I realize you're all wondering why I haven't been shamelessly bumping my latest demo and making other comments.

Here's why...

I landed a cushy temp job as Harry and Megan's "Social Media Officer". I've had to overcome my fear of flying, grinning and bearing it as H & M jet around the world to various CLIMATE functions.

Today we're in Africa to spread the message of climate responsibility, with a satellite uplink to America. Michelle Obama will deliver an address on rising sea levels from her new 15 million dollar mansion on the east coast.

Following Michelle's speech I plan on visiting NBC's Climate Confession website and confess to using plastic toilet paper during a layover in Hong Kong.

Then we depart from Africa to visit Iowa and encourage eco-conscious diet plans at the Democratic gathering where 10, 500 steaks will be grilled. The last leg of our US visit will be to NYC to visit the Baldwins. Alec, Hilaria and their five children will march down fifth avenue to highlight limiting population growth to save MOTHER EARTH.

After this, we'll stop at CNN's new Manhattan headquarters where we'll revisit the impending doom of rising sea levels with a Fredo interview. There may be bugs in the A/V, CNN is not yet fully set up following the move from its former inland HQ in Atlanta.

Time permitting( we may need to jet to Belgium for a gender reveal event), we'll drop by and see Justin Trudeau for a photo-op/soundbite on the racism of CLIMATE CHANGE.

My former activity as a writer seems so vapid now, globetrotting via jet to evangelize the world about CLIMATE ARMAGEDDON.

Hey Cochise..

Stop stealing my act.

Disregards,
Dennis Miller

******************************************************************************

Actually, pretty funny stuff..I just hope it doesn't mean you believe climate change is a hoax..

couchgrouch,
You wouldn't put the shuck on us, would you?

I'm governor of California. For eight years I claim the BIG ONE is IMMINENT, California is doomed and MAN is the cause. I regulate the hell out of companies, encourage citizens to buy expensive products to combat Geologic Change and demonize anyone who's skeptical.

Then I leave office and buy a 15 million dollar mansion on the San Andreas Fault.

Then we depart from Africa to visit Iowa and encourage eco-conscious diet plans at the Democratic gathering where 10, 500 steaks will be grilled. The last leg of our US visit will be to NYC to visit the Baldwins. Alec, Hilaria and their five children will march down fifth avenue to highlight limiting population growth to save MOTHER EARTH.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is this tongue in cheek to get a rise out of us. Are we not doing enough to curb population growth by aborting our babies. Every plane trip puts tons of carbon in the air, maybe people should stay home more. Why is it necessary to live in 15 million dollar mansions, is it to show off how successful they are or to rub salt into the wounds of people that can't afford to put a roof over their heads. Lazarus and the rich man in the bible is a good read for those that live high on the hog in this world. The love of money is the root of all evil and it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter Heaven.

The irony of it all is that the rich and politicians use these scare tactics to get poor people to cut back on what ever pleasures they have in life so they can have control over us, make more money and get elected to power.

It's a satire of the religious movement known as Climate Change. Though it has many, many sincere adherents, most of its cardinals are either buffoons or rank hypocrites, demanding tithes the middle class can't afford. A large number of its members react with religious fervor when they encounter skeptics, despite not a single one of its leaders' predictions ever coming true. They've even sunk to drafting children into their service, similar to other apocalyptic cults. I respect any who disagree with me. Please afford me the same courtesy.

Aw, Humm couchgrouch,
You have reminded me of the song ODE TO THE LITTLE SHACK OUT BACK by Billy Edd Wheeler

Whatever your side in the abortion debate, no, it could never be enough to curb population growth. The figures, particularly in Africa are staggering. Those people are going to want to go somewhere as many parts of their continent become less hospitable.

Totally agree that the wealthy should play their part. I don't begrudge them living well, but nobody needs those huge houses However a large part of the efforts to combat climate change involves finding ways to continue doing many of the things we do now in a less impactful way - more efficient cars and planes with reduced emissions, cutting back on air travel, green power sources, maybe even cutting back a bit on beef consumption.

Your comments regarding politicians are not entirely fair. Though perhaps less so in the US, where the need to raise money to buy election is stronger than elsewhere, there are many who sincerely believe in the need to take action, and that action often comes in the form of regulation. Without it, we are left to hope people and corporations act on their own out of a feeling of collective responsibility. That is not going to happen when so many people just point at others and say, "Well, if he's not doing anything, I don't see why I should either." Old bitter men (mostly) pointing fingers and ranting about hypocrisy might be the biggest obstacle in this struggle. Let's hope the younger generations are able to get things done in time.

Couch, with respect, why can't you accept the idea that these children have not been "drafted." It's a variation of the old trope about George Soros handing out $20 bills to people to join in Black Lives Matter demonstrations. These kids couldn't be drafted unless they sincerely believed in the dangers of climate change. Calling them "drafted" is just a way of dismissing them and their arguments without affording them the respect they deserve. These arguments are soundly based, not just on predictions but on observations. Among those best placed to judge (better than you or me), climate change and the part man plays in it are no longer a theory. They are part of the world we live in.

Well damn Gavin,
For many years I have been trying to learn which came first, the Chicken or the Egg and you have the answer. Climate Change? Well we have a warming period and then the Great Lakes freeze over so what the hell do I know? They say The Mills of the Gods grind slowly. If there is severe Climate Change there is not a hell of a lot you, I, or anyone can do about it. There has already been a lot done here in the U.S. but you couldn't tell it by Chicken Little. Is the Sky falling? I dunno.

"Totally agree that the wealthy should play their part. I don't begrudge them living well, but nobody needs those huge houses.




How big is your house, Gavin?

LOL, not very. I don't really want a huge house, tbh.

I thought as much. I have a 1200 s.f. house on a 1/2 acre. Is that compliant with the Gavin Sinclair Acceptable House Size, or should I relocate to a tent?

Tent.

Good. A tent it is. I do wan't to be in compliance, you know.

I'm also concerned about my "beef consumption." How many ounces (if at all permitted) would the Gavin Sinclair Beef Quota allow?

90 dB, I don't eat a lot of beef, so obviously everyone should do exactly as I do. I'll send you a Beef Consumption Exemption form. Please return it in triplicate with a picture of the cow you intend to consume and a notarized copy of your own methane emissions report.

I'll stop eating meat entirely if it will help with Global Warming (or Climate Change, or Armageddon, whatever you guys are calling it these days).


I will do anything to be Compliant.

Brilliant.



Regards,


Bob

Whazzat?,

Methane you say. A nephew once mentioned something about getting rid of methane. So I exclaimed, if you can put fresh hay in the front end of a cow and have clean air out the back the Government is looking for you. Not to mention all those Buffalo for all those years roaming the plains and putting out all that methane! Gee, I wonder where Global Warming was all those years.
Chicken Little, anyone?

Ray, some might say your posts contribute disproportionately to methane levels, although I would never do that, of course, and yes, I will have a little chicken, thanks.

Just having some fun, Ray. No offense intended.

There are corrupt people and opportunists on the left, on the right, rich, poor, up, down, and in-between. If you are trying to say global warming is a hoax because there are corrupt people making money off of "the idea" of it, I'm sure you can see that's an "ad hominem" attack and has no weight as an argument about the reality or un-reality of global warming.

To believe that global warming is a hoax does seem to take a greater "leap of faith" away from what most scientists are in consensus about, though, to me.

But it's just one more issue that is polarizing our nation. What ever happened to conversation without condescension? Jeez....

I don't hate anybody just because they think differently about issues than I do. Not even flat-earthers, though something like that makes me want to understand the psychology that could engender such a belief. Even though..when you think about it..we are putting our faith in science, to believe the earth is ROUND..cuz that's something we really can't know without following science's logical presentation, dating back to 600 BC and Pythagoras. I mean, we can't KNOW it experientially..so I guess it's okay to trust science on some matters..

And science was trusted far less in prior centuries, so it was far more common for people to believe the earth was flat. So it's not at all suprising to see the resistance to new ideas that appear, at least, to be scientifically based.

I just wish other folks could find more tolerance in their hearts for folks who think differently than them. Satire is a great way to make a point without hurting anyone, so kudos to the first post..

I think another interesting side demographic to global warming would be the poll numbers from folks who have children verses those who don't. It would be interesting to see if folks with larger families tended more towards a concern over global warming..I think I read that 2/3rds of people under thirty believe it to be a crucial issue, so I think the larger families would have similar numbers. My point being: one tends to look beyond ones own life, if one has kids, and they have kids, and so forth and so on..

Mike

"These kids couldn't be drafted unless they sincerely believed in the dangers of climate change. Calling them "drafted" is just a way of dismissing them and their arguments without affording them the respect they deserve."

True Story: My son was in the 5th grade when Obama was running for president. He excitedly came home from school one afternoon proclaiming Obama's victory. My son had apparently participated in a mock election at school and voted for Obama. When I asked him why, he plainly stated, "Because he's black."

How many climatologists do you believe are in the world today? The fact that they’re all products of the same curriculum, and mostly from the same school, and all seem to agree is no surprise at all to me....

I am EPA certified for HVAC refrigerant transition and recovery classes I and II. I've had to listen to all this crap about cow farts since 1993. To big corporate government 1000 Akers of land equals 3 times as much revenue in corn, soy, pork and chicken. If you don’t believe me, ask any cattle rancher. The irony here is, we’re going to keep getting fat off of whatever makes the FDA the most money. But they will still micro-manage beef well enough to keep McDonald's and TacoBell open.

Tony, their curriculum was probably something to do with climate science, which is actually a pretty good basis for a career in climate science They are not stupid, which means that disputing their empirical findings amounts to calling them all (or 99% of them) liars. Mix in the crackpot imaginings of it all being part of a plot to control us by big government and we land with a big plop in conspiracy theory territory.

Not having had the benefit of these guys' curriculum, years of experience in the field and time to conduct research, I'm not in a position to come up with my own studies of the climate, so I have to educate myself enough to decide whether the data is credible. It is. Furthermore, much that was predicted years ago is now happening. The opposing position seems to consist mostly of shooting the messenger. As for why disputing or even mocking the arguments has somehow become a "conservative" position, I'm at a complete loss.

As for these kids, many of them will have had intensive studies on climate change in school. To an open mind, one side of the argument, based on fact, is far more compelling than the other.

They deserve all the respect they receive for those not yet mature enough to make decisions regarding alcohol, tobacco, voting, the military, credit cards, automobiles, their own living quarters etc, etc. Their parents should be ashamed, so should the mental defectives in goofy outfits preventing contributing members of society from getting to their jobs in DC.

The entire media, as well as the entertainment industry, does nothing but promote its religion. Small wonder kids are anxious about THE END. It's no different with the kids of cults who've been taught since birth God will rain vengeance on heretics by such and such a date.

I disregard them all. As for sincere believers in the doctrine...like with most religions, the most visible members are making your faith look ridiculous. Why should I take Julian Castro's word on CLIMATE CHANGE (Formerly Global Warming, adjusted to allow for any variation in the weather as support of church dogma)? The man believes in reproductive rights for trannies.

I believe it's a scam, along with the dozens of other media-Hollywood promoted hoaxes of recent years. Hell, there's been two in the last month.

The saddest part? When a real emergency or scandal does appear, the media will have cried wolf so many times, the public will justifiably be slow to respond.

I imagine their parents are quite proud of them.

Nobody is asking you to take Castro's word on climate change. Picking out someone you don't like and thinking that discredits something he believes in along with millions of others makes no sense. The fact that Trump is a climate change denier would not be enough to discredit climate change denial.

It's not a religion. It's based on data, not faith. Global warming and climate change are terms that have co-existed pretty much from the beginning. They describe two related but different things - global warming causes climate change. The name wasn't changed by some mysterious "them" to account for variations in weather. In fact, the only known instance of anyone urging the use of the term climate change instead of global warming is Republican strategist Frank Luntz during the Bush presidency. In a memo designed to help candidates to justify the party position at the time, he wrote that climate change was a less frightening term than global warming and so that should be the term they used.

Here endeth the lesson. Darn - I just undermined my contention that it's not a religion.

Personally, I can’t wait for Armageddon.... "Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done." Amen

Now THAT'S religion! Good for you, Tony.

As destructive as they are, political threads always beat song threads for interaction.
The planet is said to be past the "tipping point" and China and India, Mexico etc are still filling the skies with Sh_t..
Dress for warm weather.

Que sera sera

If the predictions were based solely on data, they'd come true. It's a religion. All apocalyptic cults site statistics to support their dooms.

You've given no one a lesson. The weakness of your posts are in themselves evidence of my position's correctness, not to mention your awful songs. Your movement needs better mascots.

Am not certain who your are addressing. But "climate change" is not my religion. I've never made up my mind fully about it. I don't have the knowledge or information at hand to do so.

But, here is the scary part. It is about carbon emission accumulation in the atmosphere. No doubt that is occurring.
Do I think that the same minds that put Voyager in space in the 70s and are still receiving signals from it from beyond Pluto are capable...of calculating the volumetric area of the earth and atmosphere and then subtracting the earth's volume out and then applying mathematical models to the atmosphere regarding carbon emissions?

Yes I do.

Do I think that they are infallible?

No I do not.

But I worry.

Well, that's just kind of pathetic.

Forget the politicians, entertainers, journalists, etc.

Look at the science.

Not easy because scientists communicate their results to other scientists - not many write for the general public.

But there are sources of information that compile scientific results and explain them. Here is a link:

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

I selected that one because it is from NASA - which might make it believable to many.

Feel free to read it and not be worried. I'm not able to.

Scott

Okay..a satirical pitch from the other viewpoint..If I was a current writer on SNL, I'd be pitching the following sketch idea.

The setting, 600 BC, Rome. Dialogue in the style of Sophocles, and with a Greek Chorus. Pythagoras has just discovered the earth is round and has traveled to Rome to inform its senate. He takes his findings to the "senate" where Wiggus Maximus (Alec Baldwin reprising his Trump) sits, toga clad.

Pythagorus pitches Wiggus.

Wiggus is not impressed and taunts the Greek by holding onto the "thag" part of his name when addressing him, saying "so, PyTHAGoras..what is this science you keep talking about,"

Then, "PyTHAGoras, what are these scientific facts? --they sound like FAKE facts, to me" and the other senate members nod in agreement and the Greek Chorus has been repeating eveything Wiggus says verbatim.

Then "how else to explain Boltonius, Sessionus,Tillersonius, Scarramuccilus and Comeytose--all wandering off, never to be found? They wandered off and fell off the earth, everyone knows that. It's a cold, hard, fact."

At this point, Pouncius whispers to Wiggus, "sir, you fired all those guys.."

Wiggus ends with "PyTHAGoras, when you say "the earth is round" ---it's as preposterous as a belief that one day, many eons from today, there will be so much poop..let's call it waste..let's call it emissions..that one day there will be SO MUCH poop and waste and emissions from everything that it will..that it will..(Wiggus ponders)..make a hole in the sky that makes the sun too hot and then we'll all eventually die, hahahaha...ridiculous...The earth is FLAT! Go home, THAGGY.......


************************************************

That's all I got..certainly a viable SNL idea.

I think part of the problem accepting the scientific evidence is that it can be quite hard to grasp, and we DO have to take a leap of faith that it's not a giant conspiracy of scientists, made to look like they are fact-finding. But the idea that THAT could be the case seems outrageously preposterous to me. Though perhaps acceptable to a minority. Hence the sketch idea, relating flat-earth belief in 600 BC to modern anti-climate-change belief in the present..things we can't quite wrap our brains around or experience experientially we can easily have doubts about.

I think it's far more easy to accept that another, un-foreseen event could happen that would alter things and make climate change moot. Such as a comet..than to believe in a giant conspiracy of scientists..

The NASA data has been proven fraudulent.


https://principia-scientific.org/nasa-exposed-in-massive-new-climate-data-fraud/




Regards,


Bob

Here are some interesting little tidbits on Greta Thunberg: https://starsinformer.com/greta-thunberg/

She is autistic, but high functioning and it does seem that she came to these beliefs through study.

I think the science is pretty clear here. Can science be wrong and have there been "controversies"? Sure, but the facts, empirical and anecdotal evidence seems to be in favor of climate change accelerated by humans pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. I know some of you see conspiracies everywhere, but it is surprising that climate science is seen as a liberal only viewpoint. Oh well, I guess conservatism is not about conserving anything.

I think Scott hit it on the head. This is entirely a Scientific issue and debate, for some reason it's become a political one.

The left believes, the right doesn't. The reason? because money is involved, whenever money is involved it becomes a political issue.

Here's what I know. Science has not proved nor disproved a damn thing, they cant even agree if fat in the diet is good or bad for you, and we apparently know so much about it.

My take? Let's spend money on what we know is a problem, and help people.

Healthcare in this country is a complete disaster, i think we need to fix that, before we pump money into something where we dont know if it's a true issue or have a true solution for, if there was a problem.

Im neither republican nor democrat, what I will be looking at this term is what the plan is to fix healthcare. Obesity is the biggest problem we have, its going to bankrupt this country if we dont do something about it, far worse than a theoretical Global Warming issue.

Wont be enough funding for everything.

As far as apocalyptics, lets not forget that exists in The Bible, Revelation is one giant apocalyptic prediction, so who is more nutty?

And The Catholic Church arrested Galileo for stating that the Earth orbited the Sun. 300 years later they admitted he was right.

We have people on the frikon street who dont know where there next meal is coming from, and we want to spend billions on Global Warming.

But that's just another opinion.

I've been watching weather reports for nearly fifty years. It's...basically...the...same.

Mike, I mean no offense but your satire becomes tedious after two lines. Which means you're right, it's perfect for SNL. All it needs is a performer with an obvious history of racist tweets. Then, when he's fired, he'll be qualified to write about CLIMATE CHANGE!!! for the New York Times.

Jeez, I'd never heard of Greta till last week. After I read about
her, can you send me a link to some info about David Hogg?

A friend of mine has his degrees (including grad degree) in meteorology and I think I'll go with his opinion - The climate today is well within normal variations. That said there is no reason we can't make the place cleaner.

I live in farm country and our air quality is generally in single digits but what gets me is to see literally thousands of acres of corn just rotting on the stalk- It is going to be used for Ethanol. Think of how many people could be fed if that was harvested as a food.

What I cant understand for the life of me, is why the left and right have to be so far apart on a scientific issue.

We could come up with an exact science of it, and the two sides will still fight over it.

Does it surprise anyone that regulars who have posted here, and have divulged their political leanings in many cases, fit this description?

Lets ask Ray what he thinks of Global Warming...... Ray? Care to chime in

I dont understand why this is. Or how it is.

We are so damn political, most of it is due to the internet, but it's getting to a point where I cant even read a sprts article without reading some political slant

[naughty word removed] POLITICS! No president has ever changed anything, not in a grand way, things come and go and some get credit, others get blasted, but reality is Politics are good for nothing...

How to measure global warming: https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-how-do-scientists-measure-global-temperature

This is only through 2012:

I sense sarcasm here. I almost took the bait.

+1

Gavin, Kevin, Mike, Liberals.....

Martin, Couchgrouch, Ray, Sue, Conservatives....

Am i wrong? You know how id know even if I didnt know? By what they say about Global Warming

Isnt that a bit like why 66% of blacks thought OJ was innocent but 66% of Whites thought he was guilty...it was ALMOST as easy as looking at the color of ones skin and knowing what they thought about it.

Shrugs...

I would ask those that site "alternative sites" like "principia-scientifica" see their irony in a belief this "alternative stance" on climate change is the truth.

You accuse the majority of all kinds of things leading to this "conspiracy of scientists" while recognizing a much smaller group comprised of lesser established scientists as having the truth, when there is a far greater possibility of misinformation and/or conspiracy in this smaller group of folks, some of whom I imagine have fabricated credentials. I certainly would not feel comfortable reading anything on this particular site. It looks geared specifically to feed a certain mindset. And that mindset is certainly not one of open-mindedness..

I'm sure this will get a response about the liberals' control of the media, etc..even though scientists speak as scientists, not as representatives of a certain political affiliation..

Just my humble opinion..

FD,

Actually, climate change is uniting both parties, in essence, but not in it's urgency.

A majority of Republicans now DO believe climate change is a reality. It's just an overwhelming majority that, when polled, think it's not a big deal at this time..It's a much smaller percentage of Republicans that believe it to be a hoax or conspiracy.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/14/climate/republicans-global-warming-maps.html

Of course, I am sure "alternative facts" can be found to support anything at this point.

That's why everything boils down to a leap of faith. Doublespeak can find a way to make us believe the most obvious scientific facts are "fake facts."

Wiggus ends with "PyTHAGoras, when you say 'the earth is round' ---it's as preposterous as a belief that one day, many eons from today, there will be so much poop..let's call it waste..let's call it emissions..that one day there will be SO MUCH poop and waste and emissions from everything..and maybe..maybe not enough TREES hahaha that it will..that it will..(Wiggus ponders)..make a hole in the sky that makes the sun too hot and then we'll all eventually DIE, hahahaha...ridiculous...The earth is FLAT! Go home, THAGGY.......Here's MY cold, hard fact!"

(Wiggus reaches under his toga, slightly off camera, but the audience response informs what he did..)

Sue, I agree. I don't litter, I treat animals kindly, I drive a fuel efficient car.

But it's been my observation that people in power pushing CLIMATE CHANGE are, frankly, crazy. Now they're senators, congressmen and governors of states fast becoming hell holes. But there's a chance they'll obtain more power. Those people having control of my life...that scares me more than any hurricane.

AOC is a loon, so is Kamala Harris, Beto, senile Biden, Woke-a-hontas and the whole bunch. And I say this as someone who's never voted and tended to lean left until several years ago.

Those people are nuttier than Bernie's morning constitutional and I'm immediately suspicious of anything they teach, especially when they want my money to pay for it.

So you have to make a choice:

On one hand you have an organization who has pulled off some of the most amazing technical achievements of mankind. Who has compiled reports of hundreds of peer-reviewed scientific studies, has explained how they have done data analysis and even report the original data for people to do their own analysis.

On the other, you have a fringe group with an agenda who has referred to a study of a geologist (not a climate scientist) who has done a data analysis of his own. That apparently hasn't been published in a reputable journal.

It's your call

Scott

No offense taken, but I did finally come up with a "close" that I am satisfied with. I DO believe satire has more power to change minds than straight analytical thinking. Your initial piece made me at least understand the feeling amongst the majority of conservatives about the varying degrees of urgency between the two political philosophies. My piece was admittedly sophomoric, but I do think there are obvious parallels to be drawn between the changing thought around the shape of the earth in 600 BC and the changing thought around climate change circa now.




Let's look closer at that:

If the predictions were based solely on data, they'd come true.

The problem with that is the sneaky little "they'd come true" at the end there, which looks an awful lot like circular reasoning. And you are saying something quite silly, when it is broken down, something like

all predication that are based on fact must IMMEDIATELY come true, or at least within my lifetime..

"They'd come true" ignores that SOME predictions are in the process of coming true, and the full extent will probably not be felt within our own lifetime!

Why am I suddenly thinking of an ostrich with its head buried in the sand?

And to equate that the arrival decade is not upon us with religious cults who say "here's the day the world ends" ..? seriously?

Then you say, "the weakness of your posts are in themselves evidence of my position's correctness" which seems like another way of you getting out of making any convincing statements of your own, while Gavin and other's are attempting to make their points, and from where I sit are doing a decent enough job of it.

Rob, theoretically speaking, when has ANYONE'S weak argument been a proof of anything other than a weak argument? A weak argument has never been proof that "the other side" is right..only that some folks have weak arguments..

And the cherry on top, for you, is always to impugn someone's songwriting. Bravo. You are the champ of doing that. Wow..Congrats.

And the thing is, I can empathize with those that think that there's TOO MUCH hubbub over the high level of urgency over climate change amongst liberals.. So yes, I did enjoy your initial piece. But in my humble opinion, your satire was far more powerful than any of your formal arguments.

I'm sorry that you think that just because you can't see climate change happening out your back door, that it can't be real.

Mike

As I've said before, focus on the science. Ignore Bernie and AOC and read the science.

I believe, based on my research, that global warming is real. Worse than that - it's now a recovery rather than a rescue operation. It's too late to fix it - all we can do now is mitigate it. Wish I was more optimistic but the earth has a lot of inertia and it's built up momentum for change. Even if we remove CO2 from the air, the oceans have stored so much that they'll simply begin emitting it back to the atmosphere. We're already screwed - the only question is how badly.

At the same time, I believe that a lot of the green new deal is hogwash - an attempt by the far left to fold the real problem of global warming into their agenda. You are smart not to fall for it - but don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

There are things we can do that shouldn't trample anyone's freedom or rights. We can bring nuclear back - yes it has issues but global warming isn't one of them. We can plant more trees. We can remove subsidies from oil companies and give them to solar and renewables. We can give tax credits to power plants who capture CO2 instead of emitting it. Most of these things would have very little effect on John Q but could make a difference to the planet. Remember that for every nutcase on the left there is one on the right who is perfectly happy with the way things are - because they are making money ass over teakettle.

One thing I am sure of is that we won't get anywhere until we lose this stupid tribalism and think rationally about issues. This isn't directed to you, Grouch - it's just a general observation.....

Scott

I just had the honor of watching a clip of Greta-what's-her-name. I busted out laughing at the melodrama, then I continued to destroy her dreams, racing the planet toward mass extinction by chowing down on a cheeseburger.

I will sleep tonight with the comfort of knowing my house is nowhere near the energy hog of Al Gore's. Of course, I don't have an Oscar and hundreds of millions of dollars from a BS movie whose predictions NEVER CAME TRUE.

It's a religion.

CG, with respect, I think you’re confusing the issue by "playing the part" of the denier... or at least aggravating it lol.
No one is denying that industry pollutes the earth and atmosphere and there’s much that can be done to stop it. "Climate Denier" is just the latest, leftist, alarmist political catch-phrase for the ill-informed and easily misled. The biggest problem I see with this issue is that the 2 biggest proponents of "man made climate change" and the urgent need to get everyone under control.... are also the 2 biggest proponents of world government and religion, the United Nations and the Pope.

Mathew 24 tells what it will be like in the last days. Whether it is climate change that causes all the seas to be raging or not remains to be seen. The bible also says that man will curse God because of the heat. It seem our summers in some parts of the world are hitting temperatures never seen before. In Revelations it says unless these days be shortened there will be no flesh left alive. In the last days this world is going to go through terrible times, weather wise, wars, famine, disease, death and destruction, upheaval of all kinds, I believe we have already started but it will gain in intensity as time goes by. But for those that believe, look up, your redemption draws nigh.

Well, so far anybody here with identifiable political leanings have supported my theory. I dont think most people believe climate change is real, what I do believe is people believe or disbelieve based on what source tells them. If you only watch fox news, guess what your opinion will be, if you only watch cnn guess as well.

No matter what side you take, we dont realize that our "sides" are so biased. I know Dems who will vote Dem no matter what the situation is. I also know Repubs who do the same. Whether its good for the country or not, whether the candidate is a murderer, felon, predator, none of that matters, they vote their party no matter what.

Cant tell you how un American that actually is, and how stupid it actually is.

I also think we need more than two points of view, last election I thought both Trump and Hillary were jokes of candidates. I was saying in the entire country we cant find two better candidates than that?

How this applies to Global Warming..... As I wrote, I can tell what party the person belongs to just by how they feel about Global Warming

I say its a scientific question that educated scientists should be debating. Once they figure it out, then lets go for legislation, lets not let our politicians decide if its real or not.

We might as well let politicians write and record our music for us too.

I agree spin and doublespeak can change many opinions. That's why I say lets let the scientists figure it out. Lets make it a proven fact, and then try to find a solution.

As I wrote, we dont even have "proof" that a high fat diet is bad for you, many think it;s good for you, educated Harvard and Yale Scientists are still debating this

Here is what we already know. Obesity, way bigger problem RIGHT now than Global Warming. https://www.endocrineweb.com/conditions/obesity/obesity-america-growing-concern.

Health Care is going to bankrupt us before we could even figure out a way to change Climate.

Gun Violence is getting so bad, all of our children will be shot at school before they figure out if climate change is hurting us

If Im a presidential candidate, I dont even mention Global Warming, not till the more important stuff is brought up.

Aw, humm,
Is there Global Warming? Well it was reported by somebody that last year was the warmest since there were records kept.
Can't remember maybe 1Degree warmer. Several years ago when we were visiting relatives in Florida there was a severe drought and places that normally were filled with water were completely dried up. However the rains came back and the drought ended. The weather of course is not on any regular pattern so things change all the time. Places where ice and snow have built up over many centuries are melting but may build up in other places.

I can say that those that say we have only 12 years left belong on the Funny Farm. If we only had 12 years left all the fragile life on earth including you and me would be dead already.

People have predicted the end of the world is here. The last I remember was some preacher just a few years ago that had calculated the end. When that didn't happen he said he was in error and adjusted the date a bit later. That didn't happen either so he gave up. I think he is deceased now.

Oh you mean the wise ole owl Harold Camping?

He not only predicted the end of the world incorrectly once, but several times. People believed him so much they sold their belongings and left their houses and cars behind to brace for this event. When nothing happened, they had nothing left.

That bafoon believed in his own power to read through the Bible and figure out the mind of God. He couldnt.

Hey, a very good trader, or investor or handicapper is only going to be right 60% of the time. And they have alot more predicatability on their side

Reminds me of that episode of "Parks & Recreation," when a doomsday cult tries to reserve the park to await the end of the world there. When informed that it's already booked, they inquire about the following week.

Well alot of people dont know this, but here in Jersey, if you go bowling and bowl a perfect game, then die, you bowl free the next time around. When you think about that, that is a great deal.

This thing is still going....

The weather and most all energy originates with the sun.
The next biggest factors are the tilt of the earth and the rotation.
Then comes a mountain of detail.

The questions are...
Does the earth's atmosphere accumulate and retain carbon emissions?
Are those emissions enough to have an an affect on the natural weather patterns?
Are those effects enough to heat the planet and detroy the food supply?


If you say that they can't.... there is no way for your to know that, other than accepting someone else's viewpoint.
If you say that they can....same thing.

If you have no concern at all, I personally regard you as pointlessly oblivious.
There is reason for a reasonable person to be concerned.

And according to the climate changers, the die is cast and the ride is a locked in.\
Hope for the best.

Politically speaking....It would have accomplished nothin to create a slush fund for 3rd world dictators to pilfer. That was just a circle jerk. But that does not say that there is no reason for concern.

If you want to take action, travel to China and India and tell them to shut down.

get your real news here.

Marty

Im more concerned about our obesity epidemic, and healthcare crisis.

Rheumatoid Arthritis designer drugs, biologics are revolutionalizing the disease. You know how much they cost? 20 grand a year for one person.

We shouldnt be thinking about anything else right now than healthcare.

Wait a minute here. Sir Paul believes in Global Warming.

How do I disagree with a Beatle?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Wfuv63X0Jo

good article

https://ssir.org/book_reviews/entry/a_climate_of_mind

That's a really good song.

The search for a "better mascot" is over LOL

Thanks for posting that Fdemetrio. Very interesting reading.

Im just saying, we probably have decades to deal with global warming, if it is a real problem with a real solution. Im not a scientist but I do know scientists dont agree on it no matter what article you read.

But we all agree were in deep chit if we dont fix healthcare. It affects everybody

"Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's....."
Last election cycle I was so disgusted with my options I didn’t even bother to vote... However, I voted in the mid-terms and will most definitely vote this time around for what I believe to be the lesser of two evils. I don’t believe government is the answer to every problem. I believe government should defend our freedom to solve our own problems, and defend our freedom to live as proper examples for others. Be a vegetarian, be climate conscious, be proud of your ethnicity, be gay.... just don’t abuse the powers of government to insist that I should agree with you.

IF...the food supply burns away, that will lessen the obesity epidemic.

Hey All,

I live in Fiji, in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Climate change is real.

Is it man made or just a blip in nature ? I have no idea, but anything anyone does to reduce pollution and stop trashing our once beautiful planet, I fully support.

cheers, niteshift

Hi FD,

I can understand your frustration.

And I like how you put things, that climate change may be important, but certainly not as important as health care, gun violence, etc. at the present time..

It's a chicken/egg thing..do we choose to watch CNN or Fox News because we want to hear agreement about the things we already believe..or do watch CNN or Fox News because we perhaps unintentionally are allowing them to fill our heads with their stances towards issues that we have no clear opinions on before watching...

I'm sure there are liberals that watch Fox News and conservatives that watch CNN. Mainly cuz many folks love to "hate watch."

But your point is taken..

I know for myself and many artists who really stay away from most news sources end up either hunting information down for themselves, but do get skeptical if it's a sketchy source..or..we look at other people and choose which "side" we are on based on who we think has the facts and speaks the truth, and then backwards engineer from that. This latter method pretty much goes along with what you were saying, and I'm not proud of the fact that some of my "beliefs" are not very well informed and that I have looked at people and made decisions based on who I simply "liked" and believed were speaking the truth..

I mean, unless we choose to major in climatology at university, aren't we all, to some degree, putting our faith in other sources of information? Leap of faith..

And I think the worse offense is that some folks can glean a few facts about a subject and think they are well-informed. There's a LOT of that these days. Thanks, Internet!

As far as climate change goes..I also am not very well informed, but take a "leap of faith" as we must do with most issues..that there are people who know better than me, and that a shortcut to knowing stuff first-hand which can be time consuming (and still involves a leap-of-faith as to authenticity of the facts and source of the facts) can be to figure who the truth speaking voices are..and I am sure those that fancy themselves "conservatives" find a different source they find to be speaking the truth. Daunting and perplexing stuff..what came first my proir beliefs which I then seek out like-minded sources, or sources who I simply identify with and choose to let them inform my opinions..chicken..egg..

I know most of us want to believe we are hunters of information and are totally in control and in charge of what we believe, not the other way around..but your posts have made me think about that..so thanks for that..

But this chicken egg conundrum.. I don't think we can ever know, cuz at root it's a deep philosophical problem, along the lines of "do we really have free will" and "can we really experience anything objectively?"

Side note.. I noticed you lumped Marty in with conservatives cuz he took the same stance as Rob, 90dB, Tony, etc..But Marty clearly stated that he hasn't formed a solid opinion because he's not very well informed on the subject of climate change. So you can't lump him in and say you can guess his idealogy based on his climate-change-stance. And every "conservative" here has a slightly different stance. SOme believe it's a hoax or a religion or not real, while others think it's real, but just not so important. SO polling us locally on this issue would really show no clear division along ideaological lines, and that is no different than the Nation-wide polls..But as to urgency, there's the rub. There's where a clear division is apparent.

Mike

Heat Wave

Well I’m asphalt bound
On the California coast
Heading up to Sausalito
Smokes on the horizon
Fire’s in the air
It’s hotter than a jalapeño

Just another heat wave
Seems like we have them all the time
Not to worry, says EPA
The climate’s doing fine

it’s scorched out west
Tornadoes in the heartland
And storms in the Caribbean
Setting records left and right
No end in sight
It’s like a nuclear north Korean


Just another heat wave
Seems like we have them all the time
Not to worry, says EPA
The climate’s doing fine
The climate’s doing fine
I got mine I’m doing fine

No. You are not truly correct. I am conservative but not "in the camp" on this issue or abortion rights.

I am concerned that climate change is happening but uncertain of it's extent. Therefore, not denying it.
I am unconcerned with who is getting an abortion.

For your records.

Or we can execute all skinny people so that obese people will seem normal.... lol

Yea there are still individual thoughts, and that's a good thing. But the fact that i'm able to know who leans which way, has alot to do with what they say about issues.

It's a science question, plain and simple, yet it's a democrat and republican, liberal/conservative issue for reasons not fully understood.

I mentioned earlier, Galileo was placed on house arrest for stating the Earth orbited the Sun. The Catholic church called it blasphemy because if the Earth revolves around the sun, it's not any more special than any other planet, and this conflicted with the teaching of the church.

Point being, it shouldnt have been a religious or legal issue at all, it was a science issue, and science won in the end. No denying today he was right.

Btw, the Church has executed many such people, all in the name of God!

Imagine they had that power today? Who would they execute on the Global Warming issue? It would have been thought the warming was caused by God, and anybody who suggested otherwise would be in trouble.

My personal belief is God somehow was involved in creation, but he doesnt interfere, it's pretty clear he runs an open ended world. That doesnt dismiss Him in my view.

Also have to figure out by what we mean by God too.

Ok im not saying it's an exact science, but when I read Sue's comment that she had a meteorology friend who says there's no Global Warming, it drew to mind her stances on many things discussed here. If she was liberal, that meteorologist wouldnt have been mentioned or maybe even goofed on. Im pretty sure she's conservative.

But If you read Rays posts, you wouldnt have to dig too hard to know he's conservative and speaks from a conservative/republican mindset. And hes entitled to his own mindset

My point is our mindsets are usually cut out for us before we even adopt them.

If we were born into a KKK family, were going to think we're right. Often takes a mountain to move such beliefs.

Anyway Dem or Republican, nothing really changes. My estimation is if we went to Universal Healthcare it would mark the first real major change in our country.

I dont know how it would work, or if it will work, there are doubts, but we need to do something.

I'm a vet and I'm disabled, "but not service related".........a'hem. If you want to know what universal healthcare would look like in this country, just go to the VA.

Ummm....... Sorry Kevin, but I happen to know that the EPA has sat squarely behind "greenhouse emissions and global warming" for longer than most folks realize....... They’re the last that would say everything is OK, they wouldn’t slit their own throats like that...

Lol.... I've often said that myself. It’s obviously not the conservative Christians having abortions so...... why not just let the liberals do what they want with their unborn children?

Careful not to go too"broad" with this statement, because it falls apart if you are wanting to generalize and say, "I can know what party you belong to based on how you feel about issues" because that's a tautology, because how one feels about issues is exactly what defines one's party affiliation.

Few people actually study political science to figure out their "leanings" but simply discover them by looking at the consensus of how they feel on different issues. If I believe climate change is an important issue and think there should be no wall and that pot should be legalized, I am probably gonna vote that way, and it's how we vote that is the ultimate test as to our leanings. We can say anything, but when we vote, that's really what defines our affiliation.

But you are safe to say that how we feel about climate change should not be party defined, but science defined--THAT seems like a solid statement, and I agree with that. If only everyone agreed on the legitimacy of certain findings and illegitimacy of other findings, there would be no divisiveness..



Amen, brother.

Well, there's that.

For me, it's just an issue that I care not to partake in or argue over. I reserve the right to be oblivious...sometimes.

I suspect (with no proof) that there are more "conservative Christians" who have abortions than you might think. So many people of all kinds are not who they present themselves as to the world, especially when life doesn't go as planned.

There are always exceptions to the rule Gavin. But if you can’t plainly see that today there are far too many exceptions, and that sets a poor example and bad precedent for everyone.... then I don’t have a clue what to say to you. The Biblical example is simple, a mother should possess genuine concern for the welfare of her child 1 Kings 3:16. But I do empathize with children today who are given free access to condoms and taught that homosexuality is a perfectly natural alternative lifestyle....

I don't agree with "My point is our mindsets are usually cut out for us before we even adopt them."

By "them" you must mean our 'stances on issues'. It makes me imagine a National Enquirer headline:

Scientists discover new "liberal" and new "conservative" gene!

How would you account then, for people who are moderates or centrists and cherry pick things from both sides? Or those that change party affiliations? Or when the issues themselves are deadlocked as to official stance within a party?

Like your Jesuit priest (I love the Jesuits) I believe the "truth lies somewhere in the middle" and much of America is still comprised of "rugged individualists" who think for themselves and only adopt a liberal or conservative moniker after noting the pattern of how they feel on various issues. And I think most folks are like Marty who look at each issue individually and choose to think for themselves about how they feel. And to say all that is "predetermined" cancels out the fact that we've all been living various lives that inform how we feel about stuff. To borrow from Rob, I could easily imagine it is only the small minority of folks who have made a religion out of their political philosophy that actually have pre-determined leanings concerning today's issues, and then issues forthcoming and unseen.

But I agree with you wholeheartedly that it's this "us against them" mentality that is making things worse, not better. Compassion and dialogue have been replaced by hatred and invective.

And sometimes it's plain, old-fashioned stubbornness that can keep us holding onto something past its expiration date. Both you and I can understand that, I think. I know I can be very stubborn. But If, despite my dialogue with you, you find yourself clinging to the notion that all our leanings are pre-determined by the what? The great aura of the liberal or conservative mindset?..perhaps it's your own personal stubbornness to let go of that idea that is getting in the way of maybe seeing it could be the other way around? That each of our personal existences are like snowflakes and we all arrive at who we are and how we feel about things based on those experiences. Not because of some "conservative" or "liberal" gene..and experiences RARELY throw us totally into one camp or another..and it's not a closed system. We are still alive, still taking in new experience. How we feel on some issues can change, irregardless of party stance.

Just my humble opinion..

"Snowflakes........" Nailed it Mike!

What’s truly at the heart of all political debate is morality. What’s always at stake is who's going to possess the power and authority to either enforce it, or simply acknowledge and defend it. "Climate Change" is really a common sense example if you think about it. How many laws already exist to stop big industry from polluting the planet? Why do we need a new faction of government and new laws to enforce the laws that already exist?

Mike, I can see you are trying to be diplomatic and I know people respect people who try to see things fairly. When my Dad passed, at his wake i had all these people i had never seen before telling me how he was. I'm like "gee, really? i might have a clue what hes like too growing up in his house" He was very diplomatic, and really, never had a bad word to say about anybody, he had a live and let live mentality and didnt believe in judging people. HOWEVER, if you WRONGED him in any way, didnt give him the same courtesy, he would flip out. The quiet unassuming man was all in with a sleeves rolled up stance. There was that time when a gas attendent... well never mind

Not everybody saw that side. But, if he felt somebody was being picked on, he'd back that person and go to battle for anyone he thought was being treated unfairly. A very good man in my opinion.

But, I still stand behind my beliefs. Let me put it in another way. There is a republican point of view, there is a democrat point of view. If any of us becomes one, we adapted to IT, it didn't adapt to us. It was already there. Love is already there, we either accept and add to it, or we go against it. Hate is already there, we either join the club or find another club.

That is what I meant, nobody invented being Republican, at least nobody in modern times. It's an ideology that we grow into, likewise Democrat. There is a reason why swing states are so important in elections, because for most of the country their mind is already made up. Also genetics and upbringing strongly affect how we will see the world.

Why is it Catholic people when they have visions see Mary, but Hindu's see Chrishna. Jews see Moses, and Arabs see Mohammad. At near death they all report it.

It's how we are wired determines what we see and believe.

People do change viewpoints, and its not impossible, but you gotta admit, Archie Bunker was never going to agree with Meathead!

Uh, Well, Lessee here,
In the old days they used to say, somebody needs to keep the Trains running on time. I say Conservatives keep the Trains running on time, Liberals ride the trains. In other words without conservatives all those liberals would have to walk. Not totally true of course. In the real old days they used to say, if wishes were horses beggers would ride. I understand Rome rotted from the inside out because no one was watching the store so to speak. Here we do have someone minding to store in spite of all the deniers out there. Geronimo!

I think many people don’t understand science at all. Science is not some personal viewpoints that has become popular, it is trial and tested, undeniable facts. If it were not, it isn’t science.

Around here, people who can only hear what they think themselves, are the “cult” members. People in cults just agree on believing outrageous ideas, with no scientific basis at all. To me that is the characteristics of crazy.

What regular people think wont determine the outcome of this, politicians (no matter who they represent) may have a chance to help some people, though, as they can draw up new rules. Most of the world seems to be in denial right now.. next reaction pattern might be anger. This is the stuff wars are made of.

R.E.M. wrote "What's the frequency Kenneth....." do I need to say more?

And without engineers and scientists, everybody's walking

FD,

There are liberal and conservative ideologies that have existed from the time we are born, sure, and may, as you say, exist eternally beyond time, hell why not, but I believe most everyday folks choose candidates based on their own personal stances on issues that matter to them, not because they "belong to one group or another."

It seemed like you based your generalization that "our mindsets are usually cut out for us before we even adopt them." --based on a sampling of 8 songwriters over 60 who belong to the same club and then one of them didn't fit and you ignored that at first--too small a sampling for a legitimate poll.

I mean, I walked out my front door and saw..

10 Catholic caregivers, liberal but anti-abortion
2 Feminist police officers, pro-abortion but against the wall
3 men from El Paso, for the wall but quite liberal
An anti-gun rally, sponsored by conservatives

and its a hard..hard...hard--oh it's a hard rain gonna fall...

Point is..if you think life, and important things that happen in our life don't inform our opinions, you haven't proved it to me yet. You have only asserted that idealogical beliefs exist, outside of time, just like the concept of love. That is an interesting thing to consider. But I think at the practical level, most folks are not political scientists and choose candidates that embody their stances on a constellation of issues that matter to them. Otherwise why listen to them debate?

One thing I think we can agree on:

Anyone that does form their opinion on something only after seeing what a CNN or a FOX news has to say is pretty pathetic!

Though I imagine few would admit to that, and many more would feel insulted.

Scott, Kolstad,

There's indeed no argument over science.

Except (as Kolstad noted) that some people make it so by siting "alternative facts" from alternative sources.

This is a modern problem and the Internet plays a big part of that.

It seems like "reality" is now what people choose to believe it is..instead of having some terra firma beyond our own individual, sometimes arcane thoughts and beliefs that some blogger in Sheboygan is in agreement with.

This is a big overarching problem of the modern era that creates all this chaos and makes discourse impossible with some people..

Mike

Lastly, FD..

there's really no argument with you over the issues. None of them..

As I said before I said anything else..

It's like the name of my new Shoe Gazer band, a

"Chicken Egg Conundrum"

--and we could argue about it all day, but let's not, okay?

I'll think about your Platonic ideas concerning political idealogies..

But please, let's not argue over "which came first" ...


Mike

Yea, what Mike said.......... If you don’t have an opinion then you’re not worth arguing with....

You are a lot like your dad. As you talk about his traits I can see that you embody them to a great degree. I appreciate your letting down your guard and being personal. Thanks for that.

Mike

This is an interesting study of genes and leanings: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-genes-of-left-and-right/

She said I like the way he leans
He said I like what's in her genes

It's hard being so far ahead of the curve that no one can hear you.....

Hi Mark,

wow...

That was very informative, and I understand some psychology so I could follow what was said.

So it's not a clear cut nature or nurture thing. I can accept that. I DO think, still, that experience has the most powerful say in how we feel about issues.

A conservative woman who is raped and impregnated has every reason to have a new understanding of having the right to abort that fetus.

A conservative caregiver who sees the benefit of medical marijuana can see the benefits of wanting it legalized..

A conservative with a long time Hispanic maid who is saving up to get her dad into this country might be softer on immigration.

A liberal in El Paso who's son was murdered by a drug cartel might want that wall built.

I could go on and on..but we all have different lives and different circumstances and events can carry great weight in shaping how we feel on issues, and then on those candidates that embody those issues.

This is not to say that we aren't born leaning one way or another, as that study makes a very interesting case for.

If it was true, that all our stances on all issues were pre-ordained, written in our genes, even if it was true, it would be a very unpopular idea--to think that our actions really were not our "own."

Spoiler alert...It reminds me of the movie, "Network," and Arthur Jensen's (Ned Beatty) "You have meddled with the primal forces of nature" speech in which he tells Howard Beale to spread his message of how "the individual is dead and corporations are the new nations"--and then Beale does so on his show, the ratings plummet, and he's assassinated for his low ratings, lol.

To think that we really aren't choosing when we think we are is as depressing as Beale's last monologue:

What is finished is the idea that this great country is dedicated to the freedom and flourishing of every individual in it. It's the individual that's finished. It's the single, solitary human being that's finished. It's every single one of you out there that's finished. Because this is no longer a nation of independent individuals. It's a nation of some two hundred odd million transistorized, deodorized, whiter-than-white, steel-belted bodies, totally unnecessary as human beings and as replaceable as piston rods.
Well, the time has come to say is 'dehumanization' such a bad word?' Whether it's good or bad, that's what is so. The whole world is becoming humanoid, creatures that look human but aren't. The whole world, not just us. We're just the most advanced country, so we're getting there first. The whole world's people are becoming mass-produced, programmed, numbered, insensate things.

Very prescient of Paddy Cheyesky. Very ahead of the curve for 1976..but very depressing to think about.

We as human beings at least need to hold onto the idea that our personal experience informs what we think about certain issues that mean a lot to us. We may have inherent leanings one way or the other and we may be bucking them, if we are making liberal choices with conservative genes, and vice-versa for conservative choices with liberal genes. But it may be a necessary fight and a good fight, brought on but our various experiences and how they can change how we think about stuff..

It's like..the difference between reading a book about life..and living a life..

Even if that book we read encapsulates our ancestral DNA and the story it tells..

That book holds far less weight in terms of IMPACT on that person..


Mike

*******************************************************************

Arthur Jensen's monologue:

http://www.monologuedb.com/dramatic-male-monologues/network-arthur-jensen/

Mike, all im saying is, would it be outrageous to conclude that at LEAST 50% of Americans already know who they are voting for in 2020? By who, i mean what person represents the party? My feeling is the percentage is higher than that.

Life certainly filters our opinions.

Mom used to say she thought he was coming through the door, when I came through. We had the same build and same walk, my brother does too.

Maybe too much alike because my mother would end up between us on many occasions, her cute little face prevented me from throwing a punch lol

Your post brought a tear to my eye, you bastard....

We're good, bud. Check out Mark's link. Amazing stuff. It is you who are ahead of the curve on this one.. I am much better with psychology than philosophy, lol..

Later,

Mike

We're finding out more and more that genes govern many things, not just our eye color or whether or not we go bald, but how we behave and how we feel about many things.

As Mike said could be Nature verse Nurture in there.

I do know that they have done MRI's on cold blooded killers and some of them, a small percentage, but some have ZERO capacity for remorse. Completely unable to feel bad for the murders. And basicly say if let out they would do it again, because it doesnt bother them the way it does MOST people like 99%.

So now there is a whole new legal research going on, and some lawyers are already using this data to help clear their clients.

If they are incapable of stopping themselves from killing someone, how can we put them in jail?

My answer is to make sure somebody else doesnt get killed.

But it does bring the whole free will concept to light. Physics tells us free will does exist, for a damaged brain it probably doesnt matter

Oh I have a song called "She's a Jeanious...."

So I read this article Mark pointed me to and then Randy Newman and John Prine started singing this to me in my brain and so I knocked this off in short order...meant to be in the fanciful, humorous style of "Jesus: The Missing Years" by John Prine...

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-genes-of-left-and-right/


Liberals Crawled Out of the Ocean


Intro
We're punching chads for who we like
but wait, could be more to it
studies show that it's our genes
that make us wanna do it
all that raw ancestral stuff
in our genes and limbic brains
scientific studies show
that it's a hellbound train

going back in time,
back to the primordial slime....to when..

CH
liberals crawled out of the ocean
conservatives crawled out of the sea
and they've been going at it
they've been going at it
they've been going at it
since the dawn of history

V1
liberals, out of the big blue ocean
said let's abolish billy clubs and rocks
then conservatives beat the crap out of them
bringing on the very first peace talks

V2
out of a stormy sea crawled the conservatives
booby trapped their caves, drank lots of tea
said stay off our sweet land or we will club you
we really just want you to leave us be..cuz

CH
liberals crawled out of the ocean
conservatives crawled out of the sea
and they've been going at it
they've been going at it
they've been going at it
since the dawn of history

(Instrumental with donkey brays and elephant's trumpeting)

V3
and though tens of thousands of years have gone by
nothing's really changed, just scenery
as I stand here ready to..punch a chad
some ancient voice
in the back of my head
says "yes on 23" ..cuz

CH
liberals crawled out of the ocean
conservatives crawled out of the sea
and they've been going at it
they've been going at it
they've been going at it
since the dawn of history

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Righteous_Mind


https://www.amazon.ca/Righteous-Mind-Divided-Politics-Religion/dp/0307455777

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-_Az5nZBBM

Great book attempts to explain why people are divided by politics and religion.

Delves deeply into the nature\nurture (it's both) argument and actually explains why Trump appeals to his base through loyalty, nationalism, and visceral emotions...while the Democrats tout "ideas and abstracts"...but grants each side is actually right and consistent in what they believe in at their core.

Health care, climate change etc are all about very complex ideas that are hard enough to define let alone tackle in civil discussion.

The whole "kneeling in solidarity" over "Black Lives Matter" pits these essentially good ideas ideas against "The Flag" and all that entails.

Its apples against oranges in many cases. Self reliance, stoicism and "<?><)*&( entitlements" vs "we cannot let someone's unfortunate circumstances with their health destroy them financially as well" . Both viewpoints have merit but the perspectives are different.

All in all a great read to try and understand why folks cannot find that elusive middle ground

Wow... Are all liberals truly so short sighted? Do none of you realize just how young America is or remember the tyranny we fought to free ourselves from 250yrs ago, which ultimately resulted in the abolition of slavery.....?

Oh, sorry.... I forgot. None of that is part of the curriculum anymore.... All the slavers moved to DC and rewrote the history books.... No wonder you believe that you crawled out of the sea and then fell out of a tree.....

Lets start with things we (hopefully ) can agree on.

Ice is cold !

Ice cools things off !

ok so far ?

When ice cools things off, it melts in the process.

once the ice has all melted, things start warming up.

Did i lose anybody?

if you're having doubts. or don't believe me, get a bowl of ice , an egg salad sandwich, and a thermometer..

put the eggsalad sancwich in the bowl with the ice on top. put the bowl in the sun, or beside a heater.

if you use the thermometer to check the ice/icewater hourly. it will be in the 30's as long as there is ice. the sandwich might get soggy, but it will not be dangerous.

this is where the earth is now, The ice has partly melted. Houston and new orleans have been made soggy, but things are not horrible. there is still glaciers and ice fields left. you still have winters and snowstorms because the ice is doing its best to keep things cool.

once the ice is all gone, the sandwich and the water it is in will start to warm up.. With the ice gone, the temperature may rise 30 40 or 50 degrees? the sandwich will soon become dangerous to eat.

once the glaciers finish melting, the planet will really start to heat up. who knows how much? I don't. i don't think anyone does for sure, but it will be really ugly.

Oh, one other thing.

if you choose to eat the hot egg salad sandwich and start to fieel sick, don't. assume that just because you had fevers in the past that went away, that this fever will. if some of the experts (doctors) say you should go to the hospital but other experts don't, maybe play it safe just in case.

you will have to take my word for this last part, unless you know of relatives with similar fates. aArelative of mine had a fever that killed her. it was not the first fever she had ever had. the others had gone up and down, but not the last one.

Lol..... Well, I can either cool my soup or warm my cold fingers with the same breath.......

John, I read your brief description of that book and it sounds like complete bullshit. I am NOT a Trump supporter but here's what I have seen...

a fat tax return this year that I was able to put to good use. Can you name a single thing impeachment/climate crazies have done for their constituents? I thought not.

countless media frauds over the past fifteen years that have accelerated during the past five. liberals and the media are hand in glove. This puts Trump ahead by default, not loyalty. Media fraud also plays into climate change skepticism. the media has only itself to blame.

liberals are not a group of "abstracts and ideas", they are a group of fraudulent claims, libel and slander, not to mention cities riddled with high crime rates. The murder rates in Baltimore, DC, Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis etc aren't abstract and they're a direct result of soft-on-crime policies.

While liberals have many sincere devotees, more and more their leaders display a religious fanaticism on a widespread level. Again, that puts Trump ahead by default. The more the media are exposed as liars, the more his supporters are inclined to believe him, rightly or wrongly. again, the media has only itself to blame. If and when an actual scandal does occur, the public will, through no fault of their own, be slow to believe what the media says.

People have always been divided by religion and politics. The weather has remained the same in my lifetime, in my experience. However, this is different...major news outlets claiming something about a politician they don't like, only to be proven liars within hours, with NO consequences. And not only politicians, but teenagers, such as Nick Sandman.

The media fumbles the ball on an almost daily basis. Trump's just picking up the ball and walking into the end zone.

Tony,

My lyric is simply an extension of the ideas in the Scientific American article, but exaggerated to such a degree that it's satirical, cartoonish, and purposely absurd: that cavemen were basically at odds over the same issues we are today. Meant to be a funny concept.

Some might find that article absurd to begin with, cuz it attempts to prove a rather tall premise. If you remember initially I was joking with FD that his premise sounded like an Enquirer headline that read, "Scientists discover liberal and conservative genes!" --and then whattyaknow...scientists were actually making a case for this!

On a serious note, that article did help me understand that both nature and nurture are working together, I think. Nurture guides our specific choices, while nature tends to gravitate us in one general direction or another.

I was trying to keep in the initial spirit of this thread, which was to use satire in a fanciful setting. That's all. The lyric was intended to be humorous and bi-partisan and I'm sorry you didn't find it so.

Mike

Mike's lyric is humorous and bipartisan. John merely suggested that a book was interesting. What on earth set you guys off? I thought it was liberals who were supposed to be easily triggered.

I like to think that I'm smart enough to respond to obvious political divisiveness without adding to it. However, that’s getting harder these days as Christians are largely ignored. Speaking of good reading.... psychology is just the statistical study of human nature. The Bible is the greatest book on that subject ever written. Don’t believe me....? Read Ecclesiastes

Saying liberals/conservatives crawled out of the ocean says nothing negative about Creationism or negates it in any way.

The image is trying to show how absurd the idea is--of crawling out of the ocean as fully formed liberals or conservatives, or liberals and conservatives in the making. Clearly, the idea of primodrial slime being liberal or conservative is absurd, right? I exaggerated what the article was saying for comedic effect, but there's no knock on Creationists or Biblical beliefs that I can see.

If anything, the title line could be read as poking fun at Darwinists who would fancy that politcal philosophies started with apes (granted, that's not what the article said, just that the "origins" of those two ways of thinking were there) and "liberals/conservatives crawled out of the ocean" could be read as being in tacet agreement with Creationism by process-of-elimination, because the exaggeration aims to make the Darwinistic caveman liberals and conservatives seem highly implausible by using humorous situations, like liberal cavemen wanting to abolish billy clubs.

Leaving Creationism unscathed.

May I suggest that perhaps your anger is misplaced? It seems like you are upset with science because evolution is usually the unassumed starting point of many things they investigate. My piece is poking fun at science by adopting an exaggerated stance towards what they said about liberal and conservative "genes."

Mike

You're forgiven Mike.... In fact, I must admit, every time I see Maxine Waters' face I do tend to question my own stance on the subject...

This one pokes fun of the whole Evolution Creation thing as well. Before I post, I never understood why there was a need to make evolution an evil concept and against God. I was taught in school that God worked in natural ways, it doesnt get more natural than evolution. Darwin himself believed in God, but he thought religion was a survival mechanism.The Catholic church accepts it now.

Anyway an outtake from Bruce, pretty underrated tune.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1K3Ext-0tM

Part Man, Part Monkey

They prosecuted some poor sucker in these United States
For teaching that man descended from the apes
They coulda settled that case without a fuss or fight
If they'd seen me chasin' you, sugar, through the jungle last night
They'da called in that jury and a one two three said
Part man, part monkey, definitely

Well the church bell rings from the corner steeple
Man in a monkey suit swears he'll do no evil
Offers his lover's prayer but his soul lies
Dark and driftin' and unsatisfied
Well hey bartender, tell me whaddaya see
Part man, part monkey, looks like to me

Well the night is dark, the moon is full
The flowers of romance exert their pull
We talk awhile, my fingers slip
I'm hard and crackling like a whip

Well did God make man in a breath of holy fire
Or did he crawl on up out of the muck and mire
Well the man on the street believes what the bible tells him so
Well you can ask me, mister, because I know
Tell them soul-suckin' preachers to come on down and see
Part man, part monkey, baby that's me

Love the Springsteen..Sounds like Tunnel of Love era stuff or maybe Human Touch/Lucky Town..

I love how well within himself he stays but just adds more grit to his voice to be funkier sounding..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wX78iKhInsc

Yeah, I love the artsy swing/shuffle feel too, it would have to involve swinging if were talking about monkees. Brilliant!

Some of his outtakes are better than the stuff he released. Usually the more current stuff he didnt use was better than the current stuff he did use. He doesnt have a Born To Run laying around though....

Hard to argue with any of that, Tony. Teachers have been saying this for years (though not as entertainingly).

He's absolutely right about education. The kids who exceed in the classic classroom get ahead of other kids who are different.

The problem is it's not going to change, so even if a kid is not book smart, he has to try to be in order to do something with his life. Otherwise, hell end up like us bsing on a songwriting forum......lol

I agree there is more than one type of smart, but book smart is the only one we recognize. If you ever listened to some of our great songwriters talk, they clearly have intelligence, even though they may have not done well in school.

And I agree ADD, way over diagnosed.

The most important point he makes is about curiosity. You have to want to learn. Absent a mental impairment, a lack of curiosity is probably the most reliable indicator of stupidity.

Valuing our teachers more is another important point. Of course, that means paying them more, and that means the rest of us being willing to pay a little more to make it happen. Good luck with that.

Curious usually involves interesting subject matter. Ive never been curious of the answer to this.... 2(a -3) + 4b - 2(a -b -3) + 5

But I am interested in Anatomy and Physiology, History, Science, Songwriting, Risk management, Sports, Dogs

But im not the kinda guy who can miss only one question on an SAT, I know one such guy, he became a dentist

I've never been curious about that either, but I know folks who are. As he says, everyone is different.

My daughter teaches foreign languages in high school. It's easy to spot those who are interested, curious about the way a language works or the way it can help them explore the world. In Spanish, most kids are there because they have to be. In French, most are there because they want to be. The difference is huge.

and oh yeah making teachers important would help. I remember some teachers having complete command over their class, the minute they walked in, you shut up and paid attention. Others, you could be throwing paper airplanes, and the teacher could have walked in and you didnt know or didnt care.

Teaching is a talent, not everybody has it. When I think of the abuse some of my teachers took from students, total lack of respect. I may have been in my own world at times, but I never disrespected even the goofiest teachers.

He also makes a good point about Finland... What he doesn’t say is that Finland is 72% Christian and still has morning prayer in school. Here in the early 60's prayer and the Bible were removed from public schools and replaced with politics. Our schools are now public indoctrination facilities largely governed by whatever is considered politically correct.... It’s no wonder the kids are bored and the teachers don’t give a damn. It’s also no wonder that it’s mostly new college graduates, up to their eyeballs in debt, marching in the streets insulting the rich and powerful, completely disillusioned about what it means to be free in America.

And that’s not to mention how easily those same angry kids, who believe they’ve experienced enough truth about life, can be re-purposed for any other "progressive" activist political agenda.....

I'm sorry CG, but I don’t believe that we're up against a new religion.... What we’re up against is an old foe disguised as democracy. The "progressive liberals" only want power, authority and complete control.... just like all socialists/communists do. In order to gain that kind of authority the first thing you have to do is get rid of religion....... and guns.

Don't confuse religious education in schools in European countries with religious belief in society. It is often a relic of an earlier age and, frankly, an opportunity to goof off or catch up on sleep. I had religious education at school in Scotland, but that country, like most of Europe is far more secular and less religious that the US. I was pretty sure that this would be the case in Finland too, so I did a little research. According to a Gallup Survey in 2011, 27 % of the Finns believe in a Christian God. Depending on which survey you look at monthly church attendance varies from 4 to 14 %.

I know many "progressive liberals," and have never encountered a single one who wanted "power, authority and complete control," nor one who was a socialist. "Liberal" is not "socialist" by definition. I've seen socialism and it doesn't look like "liberalism" in the US. You can't just say these things and make it so.

Tony, you're not "up against" anything. Some thoughtful, concerned people want to mitigate as far as possible the effects of climate change and reduce the rate in the future. This is not an attack or a threat. Nobody is at war with you. Nobody wants to do this out of a lust for power or a desire to control you. The Pope is not behind it. The UN is nothing more than a useful forum for discussion and can't force any country to sign up to a resolution if it chooses not to. The uncomfortable fact is that this is a problem which will affect everyone on the planet, and, like it or not, it's going to require a certain amount of international cooperation, maybe even between countries that don't have much in common in other respects.

"You can't just say these things and make it so...."

Yea', I have no doubt that you have many "progressive liberal" friends and slept through your religious studies.... More importantly, I never said "liberal equals socialist" lol.....
You're right, most Americans don’t have a clue what socialism really looks like... That’s why a phony political agenda like "global warming" is the perfect disguise. Even Hitler rallied an entire nation into believing that they were God's own chosen perfect people to rule the world by virtue of moral/intellectual superiority.... but he started with much smaller political issues.

Oh, and just for the record, constitutional conservative doesn’t always equal Christian...

Hey, I was the one staying awake LOL. Actually, we didn't learn much in those classes. That was more for Sunday school. Believe it or not, I won several prizes for scripture knowledge. I attended a Christian youth group after school. I read the bible every night. I know my stuff

I have many liberal friends, but not all liberals I know are friends. Some are a pain in the ass, but the one thing they have in common is that they are not out to get you or control you LOL. As for tackling global warming being a back door for socialism or having anything to do with Hitler, well I think you just ran afoul of Godwin's Law in the worst way.

I think I'll bow out of this thread now, at least as far as the arguing is concerned. I like you far too much to keep arguing with you about something we both obviously feel strongly about

HitlerHitlerHitlerHitlerHitlerHitlerHitlerHitlerHitlerHitlerHitlerHitlerHitlerHitlerHitlerHitler.......

At least I give credit where credit is due. H I T L E R proved if you tell a big enough lie often enough, and to enough people, then the lie will be perceived as truth. Gee, I wonder which political party controlling the media today has been most guilty of that???

Three monkeys sat in a tree...
One fell, brushed himself off, and climbed back up again.
The next one fell, bumped his head, saw God, and ascended to a higher plane.
The third monkey fell, got pissed, and chopped the damn tree down...

"...proved if you tell a big enough lie often enough, and to enough people, then the lie will be perceived as truth. Gee, I wonder which political party controlling the media today has been most guilty of that???"

ooh, ooh -- I know the answer to that one: Trump, fox news and the republican party.

Kevin...If a person listens to Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh without skepticism, they are making themselves the useful idiots of a ratings race and political propagandists. No doubt of that. Hannity often bends a narrative to the right by leaving out salient facts. (the rest of the story)

And....

If another person believes Rachel Maddow, Acosta and Lemon, they too, at the very least, are making themselves just as much, the useful idiot of a ratings race and political propagandists. The Mueller report made that very clear...........................yes, it did. The CNN crew and Master Madcow bring in panels of people who try to present their wants and biases and misc rumors as facts.

The only lasting realities are things like the appointments of SCOTUS and appellate court judges. That is where the rubber meets the road and the overall battle is being lost or won. That is the real focus.

Enjoy your Sunday.

Ps...This impeachment thing is an empty gun.
My prediction....The most notable thing that it will do is keep the elitism and privilege of "regular Joe" and his rehab son in the spotlight. His candidacy is likely a dead man walking. The hard left, "crazycrats" will take him out before Trump does. Great entertainment though.

Well, Gee Whiz, What do I say here,
OK, I've got it. YOU CAN FOOL SOME OF THE PEOPLE ALL OF THE TIME AND ALL OF THE PEOPLE SOME OF THE TIME, BUT YOU CAN'T FOOL ALL OF THE PEOPLE ALL OF THE TIME.

Now on that note why did Donald Trump get elected president? The people looked at their economic situation, then looked at Hillary Clinton, and said, Eight more years that stiff, I don't think so and passed on the march to socialisim. Nuff said.
It's a tough life but I wouldn't have it any other way

+1 (in agreement with Marty)

***********************

Until everyone can agree what is factual and what is BS, nothing will change. And the momentum seems to be towards more fervency over ones own particular facts or "alternate" facts..and political ideologies are ideologies, not facts, and because there's two different slants built in, there's never going to be agreement on everything, based on those built-in biases. This is why we need to keep tolerance in the foreground of our minds before things get too out-of-hand.

My fear is that all this will escalate..cuz some people already invite the idea of a civil war between political parties.

And that some Christian conservatives invite Global Warming and religious wars cuz they will help bring about end of days? Where do they draw the line? Is it okay to want that, but not try to hasten it?

When I see, say, the words "let's put all the liberals in one place and nuke 'em" in passing conversation here, or even "I wouldn’t waste time with minorities" writ with absolutely no irony, in a lyric here at JPF..it makes me shudder and feel a bit ashamed that I am a member, and then to watch folks say, yes! --hooray, the First Amendment..

....shrugs...

But at least with that song, and songs in general..I am more apt to be swayed by a song or first-hand heartfelt experiential anecdotes than by political theory..

I doubt I can make it through another year of this..I wish the election was this November..


Mike

"political ideologies are ideologies, not facts, and because there's two different slants built in, there's never going to be agreement on everything"

@Mike... You are a true idealist. I see no "progressive activism" in anything you just said, God bless you. You really do seem to just want everyone to get along..... However, even and especially as a Christian I must ask you, do you believe it's possible? You see, as a "Constitutional Conservative" I hold dear to my equal rights as an American citizen to freedom, liberty, justice, freedom to worship, freedom to pursue happiness...... But as a Christian I fully realize and respect where these concepts originate from. At the very beginning of the Bible we are taught that tyranny is the enemy of freedom and will always take full advantage of the naive, the complacent, and those with more heart to forgive than fight. The Bible teaches there are only two kinds of people, those who serve a higher calling, and those who only serve themselves.... And no man can serve two masters. So you see, to ignore the demands of a minority that wants more than what is already Constitutionally given is no sin... The Bible also plainly illustrates that every house divided will surely fall. You're right to wish for something that everyone can agree upon, support and defend.... Our forefathers always intended for that to be our Constitution. However, no political party like today’s "progressive liberal socialist democrats" have ever been more anti-constitutional.

Tony,

This is rather Old Testament to me. Jesus said turn the other cheek.

It's this "fight" that I'm feeling in you that makes me want to duck and cover, sometimes, no offense, and IMHO It is a mirror image of other religious extremists that become militant, like the Taliban, for instance. How would the devil himself not be for an all out cataclysmic religious war? This same war that some Christian extremists claim to look forward to as it will "bring on the Apocalypse?"

And to answer your initial question, yes. I do think everyone can get along in society, in a "civilization," though there will always be it's "discontents" as we must ALL be constantly shoving down our more primal urges deep into our subconscious, where they are always leaking out into day to day life. I think that urge to fight is part of those primal urges that are leftovers from an earlier era of mankind., buried deep in our ancient ancestries, and yes, perhaps our genes, lol.

I think Jesus' way is more evolved, at least in my interpretation of Him, which may differ from yours. And if my interpretation makes me a naive lamb, ready for slaughter, fine.


Mike

Here is where you reassure me that by "fight" you are just speaking of (fighting with) words and engaging others that think differently than you with your concepts, ideas, and beliefs ... (nervous LOL...)

Matthew 5:38-40......38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[a] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.

"Jesus’ teaching in this passage has a very narrow application. It’s mainly concerned with the issue of personal revenge or retaliation (eye for an eye), not self-defense. Christ is telling His followers that they need to let go of the desire to “get back” at others who have wronged them in some way and focus on forgiveness. Augustine, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and other great thinkers in the history of Christian theology have explained this verse as follows. Disciples of Jesus should be willing to suffer personal injustices (see 1 Corinthians 6:6, 7). But they should also realize that loving one’s neighbor sometimes implies a willingness to use force. In other words, we should always be prepared to defend others who are being abused and mistreated in some way. Complete non-resistance, then, is not necessarily an absolute standard for the Christian life."

Jesus also said "Love your enemy", which is the one I have the most trouble with lol... But if your enemy is intent on your life then the time for negotiations are over, you don’t offer your enemy your throat.

Many evil men have done many evil things throughout history in the name of many gods.. But the Bible does not commission men to judge and subdue the earth in Christ' name, in fact it plainly states the opposite. If I seem to welcome Armageddon it's simply because I know not to fear it. Vengeance is the Lord's. Until then I wait and have faith that God will use me however He sees fit... "Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done". But rest assured, God has use for lambs as well.

The lamb signifies forgiveness.... Just in case you missed that

https://www.hallindsey.com/videos/hal-lindsey-report-1022015/446/

Ha,Ha,
I just had a funny thought. Suppose Trump and Pence resigned and left Nancy Holding the Bag. The speaker of the House is third in line of the presidency. I can just see it now, Nancy would say, What Happened! Now what Coach? She would find out what Pogo said, We have found the enemy and it is us.

I dont think the issue is over prayer in school, the issue is what KIND of prayer. Hail Mary, full of grace, would work nicely in a Catholic School, but in a public school...

You could then say, ok lets make it a Christian prayer. But a Christian prayer may not go over well with Jewish kids, or Muslim Kids or Hindu kids.

Id hate if I was going to school and the morning prayer consisted of Thor and Zeus. What am I supposed to do?

I do totally agree that the school systems are liberal and they are catering to agendas that dont seem normal to many.

They have groups in schools that are designed to encourage kids to be gay, be transgendered, to be soft, to be emotional, to expect life to be a fairy tale. Although, it is good that kids have some support for this, because many of them kill themselves because they dont think anyone will accept them. Double edged sword

Lets face it most teachers are liberals. And kids dont relate to their parents, so teachers become a big influence.

I never liked and dont like when teachers talk politics.

You see it more in college where teachers are REALLY liberal and are not afraid like some may be in grade school

I watched a fight between a liberal girl, who was telling the teacher that her father pretended his leg was broken to get sent home during Vietnam. Some kid in the class was probably republican called him a wussie. And the teacher started defending the girl. And the republican kid stood his ground, he didnt back down from the teachers which I kind of admired. Basicly told the teacher "hey, i have a right to my opinion, and im not paying for this class to hear yours" Hard to argue with him.

The reason though most kids are up to their eyeballs in debt is because school costs more than some houses do. I remember back in the day kids would say "well ill get a job on campus to help pay for the semester" Not any more, their parents dont even make enough to pay for college today.

its still on the parents to get involved in their kids lives.

" A man fell off a cliff and grabbed on to a tree branch for dear life. He said Lord, if there is anybody up there please help me!"

He heard a voice saying "if you believe in me let go"

He said "is there anyone else up there?"

Well The Bible confuses me. None of the Gospels were written until 70 AD. Now, i cant even remember what I had for breakfast yesterday, and Im expected to remember what Jesus said 40 years ago? On a mountaintop, with no pen or paper to jot it down, no recorder to record it?

There are also other Biblical stories that have been unearthed that are not even included in The Bible and they paint Jesus in a much different light.

My point is people can quote the Bible all they like, its not likely any of it happened the way its written, or if at all

The only historic facts we have is Jesus being born, and Jesus being crucified. Other than that we have nothing.

I do believe in God, I am a Christian, but I battle these thoughts all the time.

Trump got elected because of Middle Class America. Plain and simple. Ya see, poor people get medicare and food stamps and assisted housing, rich people get tax breaks and are well off anyway. What does the middle class get? Insert your own expletive here >

THAT is why he got elected because he appealed (lied) to the middle class, saying he would help them. He knew thats where his chance was. But Trump has never been middle class, not even as a child, his youngest son Baron has his own floor in a penthouse. He understands the middle class as much as I understand Swahili!

And you are right the public were tired of The Clintons, wanted to try something else.

But he hasnt helped the middle class in any way, he's made wealthy people wealthier.

I do find Trump entertaining and I DO agree with him on some things, much like I agree with Archie Bunker on some things. I just dont agree with his delivery, and he lies so often you dont even expect the truth from him.

I dont know who im gonna vote for, I couldnt bring myself to vote last time.

From my Canadian perspective, I think it is right to say Trump is there as much in office due to pro Trump voters and anti Clinton voters.

So much I gleaned from the endless political conversations here during the last election...plus the disturbing lesson that Republicans and Democrats cannot be civil to one another. There is no political discourse in the US anymore, no civility in discourse...just attacks.

And I am on record here as saying that, once elected president, he had to be given a chance. This is out of respect for the Office itself.

But IMO he blew the chance. Part is his own actions....which includes everything from repeated lies, repeated personal attacks on US citizens he does not like or has some beef with....to whatever hits the news....and it is definitely also due to Democrats opposed to his and the R agenda at all costs.

What the US needed\needs is a unifier, someone who leads by example, someone who understands leadership by example and concensus, not by threats or "you're fired" ultimatums.

Leadership is about setting a tone, controlling "the climate" of the country and its people. It's in what business is called "culture" where leaders set standards of behaviour, encourage, mentor, provide a sense of possibility, set expectations and equip for success....

Trump has always been about "top down" "do as I say or face the consequences" . That the country does not behave that way, that people in Washington don't act like "yes boss employees" has got to be so frustrating for Trump who is so used to having employees act on every order.

Today, now, The Ukrainian Affair is rearing its head. I have no idea how it will pan out...but I do know what I read in the transcripts. I leave it to Congress and smarter people than myself who will have access to all the unfiltered by media information to decide whether to impeach...then to The Senate to act on the evidence should it go to trial. Getting that passed will be a challenge as Republican insiders have already said it will get squashed at that level...I might add before the evidence has even been formalized and examined in the House

Whatever happens, this will polarize the country and we know that Trump will not go down silently. Like a cornered animal he will lash out without a thought except for his own survival at any cost. If it fractures the country (he has already repeated the possibility of a "civil war like fracture" if he is impeached...plus he says Mr Schiff, the House Intelligence Committee chair, should be arrested for treason)......well so be it. It is all about Trump...not an iota (well very little) is about the USA.

Now, i cant even remember what I had for breakfast yesterday, and Im expected to remember what Jesus said 40 years ago ...... At that time there were few that could read or write and there was a strong oral tradition - It's been proven all around the world that most times there were fewer errors with oral tradition than scribes written pages. (look at the Thou shall not kill which is actually thou shall not murder - a mistake in which version of ancient Greek the original was written in). So in fact people could and often did pass along information in a way we modern people haven't a clue about - especially when 98% of all our information is digital.
Trump appealed to the middle class because the Democrats abandoned them. The Democratic party has nothing to offer middle America.
The real crime of Trump is that a total amateur walked away with the big prize by out playing the professionals - This was a bigger upset than the Washington Nationals beating the Harlem Globetrotters.
On the plus side Trump hasn't started all the wars the Obama crew did (7). They created more mayhem than both Bush's. They created Civil wars in the Ukraine, Libya, Yemen, Syria. Millions dead and all that has been swept under the rug. If Trump should be impeached - Obama should be tried as a war criminal. For example the overthrow of a pro western government in the Ukraine was done only for money. They finally took the Russian 17 billion bailout with no restrictions over the US/EU offer of 5 billion and give up all mineral rights. Thousands died for a hoped for profit that the rebels have kept from the coup masters.

Sue...please tell me about the 7 wars that Obama started....and exactly how he started civil wars in Ukraine, Libya, Yemen and Syria. It is totally at odds with my understanding of international affairs so I am willing to be educated

Sue, you have it almost completely backwards. The government in Ukraine was not pro-western. It was led by pro-Russian stooge Viktor Yanukovych. Most of the country was pro-western, but he took the Russian money and declined to sign a trade agreement with the European Union. It wasn't just the carrot of the money but also the stick of the crippling financial retaliation that Putin threatened if the deal was signed, as well as Yanukovych's pro-Russian sentiments. The outrage among the population at this move is what led to Yanukovych's overthrow and the subsequent Russian actions against Ukraine and its new pro-western government, including the invasion of Crimea and the eastern parts of the country. Obama's involvement consisted of imposing sanctions on the Russians in response. It's a bit of a stretch to call that starting a civil war. As for the stuff about mineral rights and hoped-for profits for the "coup-masters," that comes straight out of the Russian troll factory handbook. A lot of what is spread online originates in places that many who consume it don't realize.

Sue, I have no problem with belief in strong oral traditions, its just not so pinpoint accurate that we can go around posting quotes from the Bible, to use as arsenal in a debate.

If oral traditons are so accurate, that would mean that The Koran would have to be correct too. They have a Prophet, Mohammad, and stories of his life and death too. As do Hindus. So do the Mormons. Everybody has a book on these oral traditions. People cant even agree upon what happened in The Obama administration which took place 5-10 years ago, yet we know precisely what was said 2,000 years ago?

The Bible and other books are moral codes. They teach goodness and give hope. They dont reflect history.

Btw, Republicans dont have anything to offer Middle Class either, It hasnt mattered who was President, the middle class always get and got the shaft. And its no different today.

I wont go into who is a war criminal, That stuff seems to be a matter of whos story you believe. I guess its much like the many bibles out there.

Here is another bit of my theory backed up.

Do we have any Republicans who think OBAMA was a good President?

Do We have any Democrats who dont think Trump did much wrong on his phone call?

Ya see? Its all pre determined, we just sign up for one or the other. If the truth is out there, nobody knows what it is.

It seems Canada and Trudeau have their own set of problems

Whazzat?
The (Republicans) don't have anything to offer the people either? Well to be factual people have all the rights they need but it is up them to provide for themselves as much as possible. There is an old saying Charity begins at home. That means, in it's simplest terms you try to do it yourself before you ask somebody else to do it for you. There are so many Social Giveaway programs in place that people forgot how to provide for themselves.

There was a story one time where the pidgons were dying in a public park. For the longest time the city fed the pidgons but could no longer afford to feed them. They figured the pidgons knew how to forage for themselves so why were they dying?
Well come to be the pidgons had no idea how to forage for food! So the city went and captured wild pigdons and released them among the city pigdons to help them forage for themselves.

I said the Middle Class, Trump pandered to the middle class, and still, has done nothing for them. Social giveaway programs go to the lower class. That is why TRUMP won. But his main focus is on Trade Wars with China.

Sue, you have it almost completely backwards. The government in Ukraine was not pro-western. It was led by pro-Russian stooge Viktor Yanukovych. Most of the country was pro-western, but he took the Russian money and declined to sign a trade agreement with the European Union. It wasn't just the carrot of the money but also the stick of the crippling financial retaliation that Putin threatened if the deal was signed, as well as Yanukovych's pro-Russian sentiments. The outrage among the population at this move is what led to Yanukovych's overthrow and the subsequent Russian actions against Ukraine and its new pro-western government, including the invasion of Crimea and the eastern parts of the country. Obama's involvement consisted of imposing sanctions on the Russians in response. It's a bit of a stretch to call that starting a civil war. As for the stuff about mineral rights and hoped-for profits for the "coup-masters," that comes straight out of the Russian troll factory handbook. A lot of what is spread online originates in places that many who consume it don't realize.

Go back one year and there are a number of articles about Yanukovych being pro western - He only became pro Russian when he turned down the ridiculous offer made by the IMF and supported by the EU and US. They were offering 5 billion and he had to virtually sign away Ukraine mineral rights. The Russian's offered the Ukraine the 17 billion they owed and a discount on gas. This initiated the US funding Western groups (who it turns out celebrate Hitler collaborator as a hero). The retaliation was the removal of favored pricing.
As far as any invasion by Russia. You do know that it is a major Russian naval base and guess what - they had 20,000 military there as a normal cadre. The only people that supported the overthrow of Yanukovych were the Western regions. The Eastern regions saw it as a coup and yes it is a civil war. The Russian's support the eastern faction and the United states supports the western faction. BTW did you ever read articles in 2012 and 2013 about what the IMF was asking for as collateral? You may be falling prey to the Western propaganda factories.

I do have one advantage and it is why I have had an interest in the Ukraine - A friend of mine sent me some video via FTP of the protests with a note - listen to them --- they were speaking Esperanto. That is generally used by former Soviet Union countries much like the west uses English when speaking to people of another country. Those protestors weren't all Ukraine. A lot of the violent ones were imported. Who paid for those added protestors? It was a coup.

Sue...please tell me about the 7 wars that Obama started....and exactly how he started civil wars in Ukraine, Libya, Yemen and Syria. It is totally at odds with my understanding of international affairs so I am willing to be educated
Yemen, Libya, Ukraine, Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria not to mention the unprecedented drone strikes in Somalia, Pakistan. Obama's main legacy in Africa is the destroying Libya and in doing so set back African unity for decades. Turning a prosperous country into a glorified slave market. Add up the numbers of people that died in those confrontations and they add up into the millions if you include the refugees who suffered because of his actions.
On the plus side, it ain't my problem - I live in a rural farm community happily retired and enjoy my home surrounded by the 101st AB and their families and eating home grown food.

Actually I did vote for Obama for the same reason I voted for Trump - the other person was worse. Seriously McCain? Romney? Clinton?

As for that phone call .... The one thing it has done is make sure no foreign leader will ever be honest with a US president for fear of it being leaked. Remember it is the 3rd call that has been leaked. The other thing that I don't think has been thought through is do the Democrats actually think once a Democrat is elected President the Conservatives won't be running to the conservative courts and blocking over and over again every little thing the president tries to do. It will happen and be just as stupid. The difference is the Supreme Court is now moderately conservative but after the Kavanaugh circus if Trump wins he might as well go from moderate conservative to full blown Thomas 2.0.
The country is divided like never before and all because some Amateur defeated the Professionals? Trump winning is like the Washington Nationals beating the Harlem Globetrotters. It just can't be allowed.
Personally, I really don't care. It's fun to discuss but in the end we are all nobodies that within a generation nobody will know we ever existed. IE our opinions don't matter except in our own misguided egos where some poor souls live for their 'gotcha' moment that few see and fewer care about.

BTW guys - Don't expect any immediate answers - I am off to other places and will probably be back in 2 to 3 weeks - have a good day y'all

True that the western regions were the strongest supporters of the overthrow, but there were plenty from the more central areas too. Of course, I know that Russia has a huge naval base in Crimea, and really Crimea should never really have been part of Ukraine to begin with. I can also see how the Russian speaking areas in the east would see what happened as a coup, and a good argument could be made that it was, although not in the way we normally think of a coup by a faction of the military. It was instigated by a popular movement. On the other hand, there were some pretty unsavory, far right characters mixed in with the crowd.

Esperanto as a lingua franca in the Soviet Union? I can't believe that. There may be people who can speak Esperanto in Ukraine, and if both of them happened to meet in the Maidan, maybe they took the chance to practice. The lingua franca of the Soviet Union was Russian.

"The Bible and other books are moral codes. They teach goodness and give hope. They dont reflect history....."

Ummmm...... I would highly recommend that you read it. There are many books of religion, philosophy, morality out there but the Bible does not present itself as such... In fact, the Bible is "primarily" a history book, validated by archeology and ancient secular historical records thousands of times over, and consequently "defines morality" by its unique perspective. In a court of law, the Bible, especially the new testament, is its own evidence because every author was a witness and every testimony is confirmed to be true mostly by Roman scribes. That's the reason we still swear upon it in the Supreme Court to this day, and the reason why today’s "progressive liberals" are so anti-constitutional and anti-Christian. Don't forget, ultimately it was politics that crucified Christ.

The bible was written through people by God through the Holy Spirit. If God can keep a book on every person that ever lived and write down every thing we have ever done, good or bad, and number every hair on our heads and hold this universe together, I'm sure He can remember and dictate to man the bible. You can have your bad deeds blotted out of that book by accepting His Son Jesus as your Saviour. If not, they will still be there when you stand before God at the Great White Throne judgement to convict you on that day. Any mistakes in the bible are mistakes of the translators. When they found the Dead Sea Scrolls, it was proof that it was much the same as our bible today, correcting little mistakes that may have occurred over the years.

Well Folks,
All I can say is get your hip boots on because the **** is getting deep in here! And yes, I have cleaned out barns.

And for a change of pace, GOOGLE ALL OF THE MONKEYS AIN'T IN THE ZOO by Tommy Collins!

Ummm, I went to Catholic School. I had to take Theology class. I read the Bible many times. I used to go to church EVERY sunday, whether I wanted to or not. My Mother went to church EVERY day. I have read the Bible.

Not sure how you can say The Bible is a History book. The Bible DOESN'T present itself as a morality book? "Thou shall not covet they neighbors wife", that stands in stark contrast to "swingers". Do unto others as you would have done unto you? If I bomb your country, I can expect you to bomb mine.... Not only morality, but philosophy entwined.

There are certainly stories in The Bible that have a ring of fact about them. We do find historic sites that seem to corroborate the stories written. Certain persons, places and events rendered true. But even moreseo do we find contradictions and flat out wrong information in the Bible.

One thing I dont want to do is challenge anyone's faith. For me there is nothing more sad than God not existing. It's a fragile life, and we didnt ask to be here, but we are and we're left scratching our heads.

Where does it say it was written through God? The Gospels werent even written by first hand witnesses, they were written by educated people who were capable of writing and had talent for writing. Why didnt God just hand, say Matthew, a pen, and say "let there be stories" and suddenly the uneducated peasants could write stories for HIS bible. Instead he did it YOUR way? Why wouldnt he choose one of his Apostles to write it? Because they couldnt write? Why not let them be able to write?

Why not come at a time in History when everything could be recorded? If he performed a miracle today, we'd have our phones up watching it happen. Doesnt it strike you funny that He came at a time when anything could be believed?

I believe in God, But I have to ask for forgiveness of Him, because most of my belief comes out of fear of death and wanting it to be true, not because I have iron clad faith. And I suspect thats most people.

btw, The Dead Sea Scrolls have presented many biblical books, not all are included in The Bible

And Muslims and Hindus and Mormons all have Books that came from sources around the same time. Why is our book better than their's?

I'm done preaching, nobody’s listening
Guess I'll just write another song
Antiquated laurels for yesterday’s morals
Who will miss them when they’re gone....

Working title... "Shut Up And Sing!!"
Lol... come on ya'll, let's write this!

Eh, well,
Religion now? What next. A few facts not in vogue or realized. The Bible, like it or not, has been polished to hell and back over the last um, 2000 years or so. Fact two. The Bible was never meant to be used as it is being used today. Fact three. The Bible, believe it or not Totally disclaims it's self. I pretty well figured out religion in about 1952. When you hear things like you better get yourself saved or you are going to burn in hell you sit up and listen. It is amazing but I have found over the years the people most involved in religion know the least about it. So please practice your religion as you please, but keep it to yourself!

Write a verse Ray!

Yemen, Libya, Ukraine, Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria not to mention the unprecedented drone strikes in Somalia, Pakistan. Obama's main legacy in Africa is the destroying Libya and in doing so set back African unity for decades. Turning a prosperous country into a glorified slave market[color:#CC0000][/color]

Sue, none of these conflicts were started by Obama and much of US responses were done with the United nations or NATO as a group decision and deployment. Definitely true in the case of Libya, which was a UN action (it included UK, French, Canadian ships\forces and others), and Syria, which the US actually stayed out of until his hand was forced by Assad's chemical attacks on his own people....and which stopped because of the strikes.


What was unilateral was drone strikes designed to take out specific terrorist targets. Now unfortunately civilians too were killed...but the main target was terrorism...who btw killed more of their own countrymen than did drone strikes.

Most of the wars and revolts you cite were due to the "Arab Spring" which started in Tunisia when a fruit seller was shaken down by a corrupt police force. A combination of other corrupt governments and the power of social media exported the Arab Spring to those other countries

So to paint Obama as some kind of war monger due to the War on Terrorism (started under Bush) and to say that by helping Lybians get rid of Ghadaffi he actually set back the African agenda goes counter to the facts. Africa would never have united around Lybia, and Somalia was fighting internally ...formally from 1991 to about 2012 ...and the US was largely there in the early ninetees under HW Bush

Bottom line

1) Obama started no wars but inherited Iraq and Afghanistan...and remember Iraq was largely based on a lie put forward by Cheney et al
2) Obama definitely acted against other countries experiencing a civil war...but mostly in conjunction with the UN or NATO
3) Obama definitely sent in drones...but these were meant as surgical strikes to take out specific terrorist targets

Now I am not saying he was "lily white" in everything...just that your narrative is not supported by the facts

John, facts are almost never facts. There is always a way to slant the facts. I have heard and read people, columnists, news people, commentaters calling Obama a Marxist, a Socialist, a Racist, a terrorist sympathizer and a terrorist, as well as a war ciminal, a liar, etc etc etc. I have also read others who say what a kind man he is, what a great president he was, how much he did for this country, how his healthcare plan was so great.

You dont have the facts, you have your interpretation of the facts.

I guess its always been this way, if you read English History books they dont mention US kickin their azz very much if at all.

It just now, its even worse. You cant trust any source any more, and even our own judgement of the facts can be wrong.

We can have a video of somebody murdering somebody and somehow it can be slanted and that person can be found innocent....or at least not guilty

Mathematics is about the only thing that deals with facts. 1+1 will always be.... wait a minute here.... 2 right? Just checking

Science changes every day, history has multiple story lines, pick your favorite.

Dangerous times especially now with the internet and the media everywhere.

When I see a guy on CNN or Fox I immediately dont believe them, or their slant. Even if they believe it.

I somewhat believe the general news man on regular news, but those stations are biased also

Also, we have a phone call with Trump and Ukraine president.

Replublicans dont hear anything in it, Dems think its treason

My guess is if Obama were caught on the same exact call, the reviews would be the reverse

Nicely done. Nicely referring to Orwell's novel 1984. "2 + 2 = 5" was the litmus test whether or not you'd been properly "propagandized" aka brainwashed, or not..if you could believe 2 + 2 = 5..

It would be interesting to hear Orwell's take on today's political climate. Would he say that any slant on a fact (or interpretation of a fact) was propaganda? Or is there some point where, given too much slant (or too much interpretation), a fact ceases to be a fact...

But with climate change, specifically, we are talking about data, and that's different from facts.

Data can be open to interpretation, unless it can be established that certain patterns of related data absolutely must mean certain, specific things. Here's where climate change data and its interpretations splits scientists into two camps.

It can come down to who you choose to believe, this scientist or that. Granted, it does seem like most of the important scientists say that climate change is upon us.

Anyway, I enjoyed your wink towards that great novel that is ever so relevant in today's world.

Mike

Fdemetrio, I get what you're saying. Everyone has a bias when it comes to interpreting facts. However, the underlying facts are there. Anyone calling Obama "a Marxist, a Socialist, a Racist, a terrorist sympathizer and a terrorist, as well as a war criminal, a liar, etc etc etc," is quite simply wrong, maybe through malice, but also maybe through ignorance. The exception would be liar. No politician has never told a lie.

As an aside, I grew up in Britain and we did learn quite a lot about the American Revolution in class. Obviously it would not have the same emphasis as here, where it is the foundation story of the whole country. Since I was in Scotland, that kind of reverence was reserved for our own wars of independence, but we did cover it in quite a lot of detail, though not until high school. Oh, and that azz-kicking, we did learn that a lot of it was done with stylish French leather boots, since they were still sore about the Seven Years War and farting in our general direction just wasn't doing it for them

When it comes to solving the issue of whether man-made "global warming" is real or not real.......how can anyone take a stance that it isn't real--given our pollution may be the cause? We have to and can not afford to not curb and discontinue certain emissions such as CO2. That's not to say that man-made global warming it isn't real, but because we see climate change happening, rapidly within our own lifetime, we have to assume that we may be the cause. There are some mistakes that may not be fixed as Scott pointed out. We have to be proactive as a collective world.

But determining whether it is a long term cycle or short term weather cycle--we do not have enough historical weather data far enough in our written history to determine that; nor does 4,000 yrs of history represent much geological time anyway.........Yes, we do have geology that shows us the prehistoric stratigraphy and much about the earth's changes from era to era--but that's no guarantee that the future will replicate the past or gives us definite answers on rising temperatures. Our solar system and all the planets orbits have different cycles, the sun also orbits "something," though we're not exactly sure what, which means we are following the sun through space like a corkscrew as we orbit the sun. So many possible changes in the solar system's movements could effect our climate in cycles that may only repeat every 10,000 years--who knows?

But more importantly than arguing about whether there is or isn't an effect by mankind (personkind) on major climate global warming--we HAVE to assume that there is for two reasons: 1, It may be true, and 2, there is no question that it is better for our beautiful earth to minimize pollution and clean up both our air and our oceans. What is the bio-plankton starts dying.........? We get more oxygen from the bio-plankton in the ocean that all the plants and trees. Trees are great and they surely help, but without the bio-plankton, not only would the ocean die, but our air would lose it's major oxygen vendor.....................

I like what Scott has to say, and he's right on. Couch, I enjoyed your satire as well.

steady-eddie

I don't know why I bother but the bible tell me if I see someone heading toward destruction and I don't warn them, I will be held accountable. Another place it tells me not to toss my pearls before swine. Is this one of the contradictions that you say are in the bible? Most of the bible( old Testament) was the history of the Jews. Most of the new Testament was written by Paul, who was a scholar, Mark, who was a Doctor, wrote much of it too, plus John and others. God wrote the ten commandments in stone, good thing He didn't write the whole bible that way, fingers of fire would not allow Him to write on paper, I would not want to lift a bible of stone. We are seeing the bible unfolding before our eyes today. The things that are happening were foretold by Jesus, including this climate change when the sea will be raging, volcanoes and earthquakes in diverse places, wars and rumours of war, famine and pestilences, they will increase and then the end of the age will come when He will set up His kingdom. There will also be a great falling away( which is happening now in affluent countries like America, Canada and Europe) and a great revival (which is happening in Africa and Asia). Sounds like another contradiction but it's not.

That's it, I'm through casting pearls.

Canada's CBC publishes article on how to spot "fake news". Worth reading

Part One https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/fake-news-misinformation-online-1.5196865

Part Two https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/fake-news-disinformation-propaganda-internet-1.5196964

But how are you obtaining the UNDERLYING facts? You had to have read them somewhere or heard them somewhere. Somebody had to write those "facts"

Let me give you an example: https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.co...riminal-butcherer-of-women-and-children/

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/...-afghanistan-libya-yemen-somalia-n704636

Back to climate change

What I favour is making companies absorb and price in ALL the costs of their activities. Those simply passed on to society without any regard to impact include pollution, plastics in the Pacific, and all the factors that affect the environment and our climate.

Right now companies cannot pollute willy nilly, though if news reports are true, stuff often gets messed up in the chase for profits. In Canada three waste disposal companies had a shipment of plastics tracked. Only one did as they promised...bring it in for recycling....one burned it in what they claimed was a "clean" incinirator, and one simply dumped it in a landfill. News investigators also found that although fast food places may allow customers to segregate their waste, in the end it is all set out as garbage at the curbs. Challenged by this, one such shining example of citizenship said they allowed customers to "recycle" because it made them feel good about buying from them, but that actual recycling was "too costly".

Not far away from me Nestle's owns artesian wells from which it pumps water....very cheaply I might add (bad government...bad government...) ...and sells it in plastic bottles...after which it cares not a wit.

I expect we can find lots of examples where companies pass on their costs to society.

To me this is really where Eddie's argument....why fight good policies that attempt to clean things up, even if you do not believe in climate change?....resonates with me.

Maybe mankind's affect on the climate is not real...or limited...or not as bad as argued. What is real is tainted water, loss of water (hello Southern USA), polluted lands and waters, a huge mess of plastic in the Pacific...again, let your own research find what IS real

That is why I dont tell Jehovas Witness people to get away from me. I realize they believe they are helping me, and helping themselves. They dont know how to think independently, they think every religion is wrong except their own, but they seem sincere, so I treat them with respect. "Would you mind if I ask you a question"
Sure, ga head knock yourself out....
"Do you think the world is seeing some troubled times"?
Oh chit yet, we are screwed mama...(teehee)
"well im glad you see that, because what If I told you that the Bible said this would happen" Let me tease a bit.... Well, how do you know the Bible was talking about now? The revolutionary war was pretty awful, so was the civil war, and WW1 and 2, maybe the Bible was talking about those times, and not now? Smiles..... they dont usually dont know what to say. lol

But I see Jehova Witnesses seemingly every time I step outside. They dont wait to knock on doors any more they hang around street corners. I had a young kid, must of been 15 years old come up to me, hand me a leaflet, and said. "I just want you to know Jesus loves you" Again, I thought it took alot of courage to do that so I smiled at him and said thanks, Nice to have him on my team.

One time I saw a really pretty girl walking down the street with a bible in her hand, she wasnt Jehova, but Born again. I ended up writing a song about the incident, if I can find it ill post it.

But you do have realize faith is an internal thing, and no logic can support it, it's an instinct and a feeling. If you argue with somebody preaching logic, you're gonna lose every time. The two weren't meant to be compared.

You cite the CBC?


Seriously?


Couldn't find anything from NPR?



Regards,


Bob

Nope... I cited articles published on its web site that talks about disinformation and links to tools one can use to figure out the truth for yourself.

No problem if you do not want to read them or look through the tools....but I do have an issue when you simply dismiss things outright because you don't like CBC....even if you added the smilies

I agree. But I am already hearing the counter argument in my head, "because it's just giving money to the actual really corrupt people who've been brainwashing you liberals."

Again, there can't be a discussion on this until everyone at least finds SOME common ground from which to start.

Let's start here:

1) No one wants the world to end anytime soon, except radical conservative groups within that party who are happy to have the "End of Days" upon us.

2) Cleaning up the environment CAN be done in a way that is WIN/WIN..where nobody loses--and maybe we just need to keep working TOGETHER to find that common ground from which to work on this?

3) If a scientist falsifies data and/or is in the pockets of big business, that is a MAJOR crime, because we must be able to trust our scientists and their data, and their opinions concerning what that data means.

4) Changing one's position on something can be very hard to do. The more invested, the harder it is..


Anyone care to add to my "common grounds" list, feel free.....



And a personal aside...I find it quite a stretch to believe that EVERY science-based opinion that supports that climate change is real is corrupted information or a corrupted opinion. That would be a conspiracy bigger than "The Illuminati." This suggests we are indeed living in Orwell's world, and only the conservatives are not brainwashed.

This is why I just want to write and produce music....


Mike

Right. You cite the State's Media arm, with regard to "fake news". Can you be so gullible? Here's another look at the "author":


https://www.therebel.media/cbc-onli...-sandra-solomon-anti-islam-youtube-video



Do some research, man.

Holding up a far right obviously bogus "news" network as a research tool on a par with the ones John cited, while calling him gullible and suggesting that NPR is fake news in comparison shows just how successful the war on truth has been.

War on truth?



You crack me up, man.


How's your new website going there, Gavin? Getting much traffic?

Common ground #5...

5) Ad hominem attacks add nothing to a dialogue and only escalate animosity.

My response was to an ad hominem attack on me.


"escalate animosity"?


You crack me up too, dude.

Good grief people...... War on truth? SERIOUSLY?!? Why aren’t any of you progressive communists talking about EXACTLY HOW THE NEW WORLD ORDER PLANS TO REGULATE THE ENVIRONMENT?!?

I would elaborate myself... but I'm done preaching, and I need to go pick up my concealed cary permit....

Hmmm....

We're supposed to play nice, when we do we are in some sense being phony...as is the case with critiques. When a discussion comes up it becomes apparent who forget leans, who tilts the whole way toward one side, and it gets ugly.

This is really our biggest problem now. There's no communication between the left and the right.

When we ask for facts, we deal our facts through websites we believe to be right. I remember a time when the news used to say what happened, not this happening, but for certain reasons etc etc etc

We should be able to read an article that says what Obama did, and take it at face value, but these motives and reasons pop up.

To be honest with the whole whistle blower thing, i heard both sides, I read the transcripts, and I dont know what to think. Maybe thats why we go to sided websites to see what they think of it, and THEN we go with that.

I dont know if Trump sold the country out, or he didnt do anything, and we have a phone call on tape, and I still cant determine what was done.

Facts come from people, people have biased. That's just how it is but on steroids these days.

Hearing people's opinions sure does trigger people today. And it's not even just politics, just any old expressed opinion.

Suddenly all the musical fellowship goes out the window, replaced by a kind of road rage, only without a road.

Why is that? How come the writer of that sweet little song about Mama's Peach Pie suddenly wants to shoot you in the piehole? It's unsettling to see it so often, with so many people, watching those people change gradually, get a little more weaponized every time.

I remember a time not long ago when controversial topics argued online didn't catch fire so quickly. There was plenty of drama and argument...but the escalation into that non-listening, condemning state of righteous wrath...man, that sure is popular these days.

LOL. Tony, I'd try to help out, but I've lost the phone number for the New World Order, so I can't call and ask them about their nefarious plans.

I'd ask a communist, but I can't find one.

So you looked into my soul and just knew that I was saying yours was ad hominem and NOT Gavin's:?

+1

********************************************************

I have always said politics were a form of entertainment. Chit, I was entertained when I watched Trump debate Clinton, it made for good TV. It didn't make for good relations or politics.

I think people would rather talk about politics, and complain about them, then see a change happen.

I think i was raised mostly democratic, by dad was a union man so traditionally Dems support unions. I have some conservative in me too, prolly a conservative democrat, but I like to think my vote hasn't been mailed in already.

But it does remind us, just because people dont always remark to us on a forum, it doesnt mean they dont despise us. And it doesnt mean they dont think our songs suck if they play the game and give nice comments.

As we've seen once people get in an argument, suddenly their songs suck too!

And btw, 90 dB, happy to entertain.


You come off like a bully, to me, though. Not really trying to engage in real dialogue, just very quick to be verbally hurtful.

But it's easy to understand. We have a President that makes that kind of bullying and belittling seem perfectly normal.

I am trying to help folks figure out how to find common ground to talk one another. If this cracks you up, perhaps consider this is part of the problem?

Some people don't REALLY want dialogue, but to vent there deep seeded anger..

Mike

Since your response directly followed my last statement, it was obvious who you were addressing. Nice try. No sale.

So you are calling me a liar?

The chit is gonna hit the fan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fa7nSzCiGXk

Folks

We all love writing songs. That is our union.
Political threads are poison. I suggest that you guys fade this quickly to black.

Sincerely

Martin

I agree. Another year of this?, Seriously?

Yes, but it's also a microcosm of the world/internet today. One would never think a songwriting forum could be used to show the problem with politics today, but it can and does.

dB,

For the record, no, I WAS NOT gonna respond after Gavin, though I DID SEE that his was a disguised ad hominem attack.

After your response, there were attacks from BOTH SIDES.

If you knew me, you'd know I hate it when people fight.

So after BOTH of you had attacked each other, perhaps in my misguided attempt at "fairness" or "stopping a potential fight" I then thought it the right time to say something.

And I don't appreciate the insinuation that I was lying.

I see why he got upset, sometimes its just the timing of the remark. The person who spoke last, seems to be the recipient of the comment, or takes it that way

Chicken chit stuff, guys. Anybody want a beer?

FD,

I could use one but I quit drinking 12 years ago and not gonna lose that over this.

I am shaking..

I am supposed to be singing a demo, right now..

This place can be VERY toxic.

You have become a voice of reason (or maybe always were) and I appreciate that.


Mike

Congrats on the sobriety, ill buy you an O'Doul's

I think we both came from argumentative parents...so some of us grow up wanting to be peacemakers...

Well, I could tell you stories of fist fights, or near fist fights, at family picnics, over some of the most inane stuff, like what football player changed the game more...lol

I can be very argumentitive, it must do something for me, maybe it relieves stress.

But these days our family picnics are devoid of politics. We have brothers and sisters on both sides of the fence so there is a mutual agreement to stay away.

I think you are right. There is an ad hominem element in my remark. It was a pretty cunning disguise because it fooled me too I wasn't implying that 90dB was personally waging a war on truth; that is something that I personally consider the kind of websites under discussion to be guilty of. That's my opinion and nobody else is obliged to share it

Actually, this is kind of a hot button for me, and I should probably just shut up, follow Fdemetrio's suggestion and have a beer. Cheers!

--

<clink of bottles, mine Odoul's, LOL>

Yep, it assumes that what dB knows is not true without attempting to forward the dialogue with anything meaningful. But you own it.

I've been trying to get vocals done and have been poking in and out, and only saw your remarks minutes before dBs response .

The assumption should not be we are all glued to JPF, hitting the update key every minute.

It ain't a microcosm of nothing. It is what we make of it.
It should be a place where amateurs mostly discuss an avid pastime.

I maintain an " internet cat box." It is a political forum that is defacto about Trump. I tell people what I think of what they think. They tell me I'm an azzho and when I get bored I click on something else. I am anonymous.

It is designed for arguments. It serves a function for me. I drop a "steamer" on someone (say what I really think) and leave. Well, maybe drop a few. Everyone there signed up for the format. Importantly, It prevents more than half of you all from hating me because of politics. If the people in the cat box hate me, that is an issue of no concern.

You should try it.

Threatening?!? I'm disabled... I can’t run away... I’m truly afraid because YA'LL HAVE LOST YOUR DAMN MINDS!!!

Will someone please take a moment and actually READ THIS CRAP!?!?


https://unfccc.int/files/meetings/paris_nov_2015/application/pdf/paris_agreement_english_.pdf

How do James Carville and Mary Matalin do it? Married 26 years?

There's a movie in that, or at least a song. I envisioned a musical, cuz their wordy arguments, early on, are perfect for musical counterpoint. Two melodic streams interweaving..

Or maybe they could do what G. Gordon Liddy and Timothy Leary did in the Eighties--tour the country, give us a few laughs, and calm us all down a little

I imagine they have something to teach all of us. Politically polarized but able to not only tolerate each other, but be married!


Mike

The grinning tongue in cheek distraction doesn’t work well with me....
This “agreement” elects a single global entity to police the way every single person on this planet lives, from what we can eat, drink or cloths we can wear, to what kind of transportation we use, how far we commute to work and how high or low we can set our thermostats. It’s nothing but a money and power grab, the initial result of which will be the doubling of gas and utility costs, and we will pay more taxes for the privilege! Making the rich richer and the poor…. Irrelevant. We’re talking trillions of dollars world wide here under the guise of equality and human rights… Since when has any governmental agency with that much money and authority ever allocated funds to actually fixing anything? Overnight, the UN will become the single most powerful policing agency on the planet, with the endorsement of the catholic papacy… If you believe for one second that a governance that large would slit its own throat by actually fulfilling its purpose… God help you.

Tony, I actually read the whole thing. Thanks for posting the link. I'd never read it from beginning to end before. I thought your outrage was because of all the repetitive politically correct legalistic gobbledygook that inflates what could be a two page document into a sixteen page mess. I would be onboard with that complaint. It looks like they divided into committees to come up with each section and nobody was too sure of where their area of responsibility ended. I suppose that with so many countries involved, you have to put up with this in order to get to a couple of actual agreements.

I see absolutely none of the things you see in it. "A single global entity to police the way every single person on this planet lives." The agreement specifically leaves it to each signatory to devise how they will meet the goals that they themselves set. It says this in about ten different ways. It does ask countries to report their progress so that a global assessment of progress can be made periodically. That's it. The international bodies it sets up are toothless. Almost nothing in the document goes beyond a statement of intent. I think you are mistaking a Yorkshire terrier for a tiger.

I'm not one for conspiracy theories or "world orders" or some "co ordinated effort" ...but I do see and know that all industries and wealthy people hire lobby groups to sway public opinion and legislators.

One that hits home to me is Big Sugar. Back in the nineteen fiftees and subsequent decade there was a big debate about the health effects of sugar vs fat. Sugar won and there is evidence lots of scientific studies were funded by the sugar industry and its major players. In the end the government published a food guide that excoriated fats, but gave the sugar industry free rein to add it to whatever they wanted...which if you read labels is a lot of sugar in a lot of products.

Fast forward to today and America...and countries around the world are facing a Type II diabetes epidemic and many people are obese.

Today scientists and medical professionals understand that this is the body's response to too much sugar. What is not burned off as fuel for energy is, using the body's insulin, packed into fat cells for future use....but that day does not come because the next day...once again too much sugar. Over time the cells are so packed with this potential energy that the body resists insulin and voila, Type II diabetes.

Earlier this year I read a book by Dr Jason Fung...two books actually, The Obesity Code and The Diabetic Code in which he outlines the rise of sugar use\consumption and the rise of obesity and diabetes....and I did two simple things. I eliminated added sugar as much as I could, and compressed eating good food into 8 hours a day...that allowed my body to start drawing on my sugar reserves.

Since then I have lost about 30lbs and my blood sugar has returned to the normal range from closing in on "pre diabetes levels"

Better yet, less inflamation in joints (also due to weight loss) and best of all...no food cravings. It seems that once you cut sugar out of your diet that craving for sugar stops...

What motivated me was simply being p^&^*sed off by the fact that Big Sugar paid off scientists and the government to favour it over fat...and Fung saying that diets fail because they do not solve the real culprit...it is not about will power and calories as much as the over consumption of sugar in what you do eat. You think yoghurt is good for you? Well it can be but most servings contain multiple grams of sugar. Cereals? Full of sugar. Pop? A HUGE culprit with multiple spoonfulls in every container.

So with that I cut out sugar, fasted intermittently, and in a matter of days...really days...my food cravings disappeared and weight loss started.

Since "winning", Big Sugar, the corn and corn syrop indistries made billions if not trillions of dollars collectively over the decades...which is why they fought so hard to discredit fats.

Take that same approach to other industries who pay scientists and lobby groups...and in public debates, "follow the money" to see how public opinion is being engineered.

I cannot see how the climate change debate is any different. Those who stand to lose the most fund and release and promote studies that favour their position and lobby legislators to ensure their positions prevail. It is simply how things work.

The public is left to decide, according to their own "filters", what is right. And these filters are often legitimate from the individual's POV

Take another hot button. Gun control.

It is absolutely right to invoke the 2nd amendment, self reliance, individual responsibility, "guns don't kill people, people do" , the right to self defence because they are legitimate points of view. But it is also right to point to horrible mass shootings and murder statistics and demand that, in the name of public safety, restrictions be placed on certain firearms, that owners be vetted, training is mandatory etc. But the NRA, even as its membership is small, is very well funded and has a powerful lobby and gets its messages out very well. The result is a polartized public entrenched in their own opinions

Here, today, we are all entrenched ...and everyone rationalizes what they believe with their own beliefs and experiences. The problem is no one makes room for another person's position and disagreements often turm nasty. This thread is simply a case in point. The last federal election was a nightmare here and Brian in the end banned these types of dicussions....and we lost some good people as a result. I myself went away for awhile because of the fallout.

I guess the bottom line here is

1) have some tolerance towards others' POV because they are right based on their individual experiences
2) don't get personal, accusatory, inflame etc...focus on the issue being debated and bring facts (as you know them) to the party
3) understand it is not necessary (and very difficult if not impossible) to come to an agreement on some things (politics, religion are cases in point)...it is the exchange of viepoints that is the objective
4) be open to learning something new

I'm far from perfect, so take from this post what you will. But please if there is one thing .....have some respect for the other's point of view because they believe their POV as much as you believe yours

You didnt understand the statement. Yes it should be a place amateurs discuss a pastime. And that what it is. But what I mean was the hatred of the other side, merges into this space when politics are talked about. We saw lefties and righties getting hostile towards each other. The sides are becoming so far apart.

THAT is the microcosm of the world/internet, because its the same anywhere you go. Political discussions mirror each other

Big Sugar is also a conspiracy theory, so is the theory that cures for cancer are withheld from the public, because the profits for treatments are too big for pharma to lose. I often dont eat for 24 hours at a time, I found out I could do it by doing all nighters recording songs and then realizing "hey wait a minute, I didnt eat a damn thing all day" Or sitting at the blackjack table for hours upon hours. When I read about the benefits, I said hey ive done that already. I guess the trick is stay ocupied so you dont think about eating. Ive probably gone 24-36 hours without even realizing I hadnt eaten. Ive done 3 or more days just to see how it would go. Its much harder when you are aware you havent eaten...lol!

Fasting can be good for you. And sugar was not supposed to be eaten by humans, as you say the 1950 marked the commercial boom, where it became cheaper to box stuff and lace it with sugar so it lasts longer.

But this is what the public wanted. People started the hustle bustle lifestyle, and didnt have time to prepare three meals a day. Voila, the fast food industry was born. And its damn tasty too!

But the real reason America is so fat is because we have too much food! Everybody knows how to lose weight, no secret diets, just put the fork down! In simple terms.

Guns are a hot topic. there cant be a more helpless feeling for say a father, not to be able to protect his family from an intruder. He should have that right.

It just creates alot of other problems like accidents, and nerves, and reactionary skills. Even the police get into trouble using guns legally

It may have to come down to all public places having metal detectors. It's a price to pay, but im willing to be checked down when I walk into a mall. It seems it has to be this way.

Actually we have satiation hormones that tell us when we are full. You simply cannot eat volumes of meat or fruits and vegetables...BUT...the intake of sugar actually tickles your pleasure centers, so it is far too easy to fall into "there is ALWAYS room for desert"..ie something sweet. That is not to say you are wrong in the over eating hypothesis...because that IS spot on. But over eating vegetables and fruits is far less damaging than filling up on processed foods (most contain sugar to enhance the taste), potato chips, snack foods and all the other stuff that is full of sugar....mainly because of the sugar highs and crashes that cause food cravings

So if you say the problem is over eating "bad food", that to me is exactly right...but because it is driven by hormones, and because the hormones say "FEED ME NOW", it is very hard to resist. This is why reading Fung was liberating because he says that failures in dieting it is not your fault because it is not fats or calories but sugar. You are simply listening to your body and giving it what it needs and craves. That is why eliminating sugar is so useful. It eliminantes the sugar cravings and the body's messages that drive the desire to eat.

And that gun debate is definitely tricky..your solution to it...to screen all users of vulnerable public places...is costly, time consuming and frankly just confirms someone with the right to carry a gun is actually carrying one. Not saying its not workable...just that it is easy to resist its imposition.

We over eat, and over drink. You can over eat veggies too,and fruit is disguised as good for you food. Orange Juice is just as bad to drink as soda for your sugar. No hypothesis, pure truth. https://www.vox.com/2016/8/31/12368246/obesity-america-2018-charts

A metal detector in public places may cost some money. But arent you complaining about guns?

Aw,humm,
Whazzat? Conspiracy theories? Now at one time there was the thing that somebody invented a carburator that would get 500 miles per gallon of gas but the big oil companies bought it so they could sell more gas. And some people believed it!

Yes I agree...over eating is the problem...but the "refined argument" is over eating processed foods and over drinking fluids that contain sugar is the real culprit. Over eating "good foods" is not the issue.....

And my primary argument is that these divisive issues are entrenched because those taking sides have their own viewpoints that are valid to them. So yes...metal detectors is a great idea...BUT opponents will argue against it and develop very good reasons for that

Hence my suggestions of the "4 rules" which I will repeat because that was the essence of my post. The rest was background leading to it...and I raised gun control as a particularly thorny issue that has entrenched sides

1) have some tolerance towards others' POV because they are right based on their individual experiences
2) don't get personal, accusatory, inflame etc...focus on the issue being debated and bring facts (as you know them) to the party
3) understand it is not necessary (and very difficult if not impossible) to come to an agreement on some things (politics, religion are cases in point)...it is the exchange of viepoints that is the objective
4) be open to learning something new

Cheers

Hi Ray...nice to see you. You are a perfect example of someone with an entrenched point of view that has to be respected. You have always argued self reliance, individualism etc and deplored handouts. Now we don't see reye to eye on a bunch of stuff, but that would not stop me from enjoying a beer with you and some creative dialogue around those issues and generally getting to know you better..

I will never change your mind about some of the things we disagree over...and that should not be my objective. I do "listen" to you, counter some of your arguments, but that does not mean I think you are stupid, pedantic or any less than anyone else. You developed those POVs through your own experiences and embrace them...and that should never be disrespected or discounted

It must be hard being a conservative who denies climate change. I can honestly empathize with that. You are entitled to your opinions and beliefs.

On top of all the ridicule you get from liberals, you have to have seemingly far-fetched, to the majority of people, air tight alibis/beliefs for why the majority of the press accepts climate change as fact (it's a liberal conspiracy), and common everyday liberals as well (they're brainwashed), and then put all your faith in alternate news sources--that they are the ones telling the truth.

Hard to do, without a busload of faith it seems...

Faith seems key in all this. Can a conservative who denies climate change harbor doubt about his/her position? Doubt can be a healthy thing in most matters. To NOT be able to doubt one's "denial" seems to put your "beliefs" in the same realm as a belief in God. Something beyond data and facts, that can't really be known in earthly terms. But climate change is all about earthly terms!

A question you could ask yourself, to know if your denial of climate change is faith based is, "is there ANY possible scenario that could happen to where I would change my mind about climate change and accept its reality?" If you found yourself think "no" --then may I suggest that's something to look into? Can you at least see that your denial would not be about climate change, really, but something else? And ask yourself honestly..I mean..it does you no good to lie to yourself, right?

As someone who believes in God and that climate change is real, I can say that I sometimes have doubts--mostly doubts about climate change's reality, in spite of looking at what most of the experts say. Though the data is easy to understand and I don't think these scientists are in anyone's pockets. I just think along the lines, "what if SOMEHOW they're wrong.." or "what if it IS a giant conspiracy?" and don't think that's in any way unhealthy.

Lastly..I can imagine it can be really tough being a climate change denier and a songwriter with children and maybe grandchildren..cuz you must block at all times the thought that maybe your position is helping make unlivable conditions happen faster for your offspring's offspring's offspring, and that those songs you wrote that your future great grandchildren could stumble upon could get read or listened to but be dwarfed by those great grandchildren saying "yeah, good songs, but look what he/she helped do.."

I can empathize with how tough it must be to believe what you do..But if you reply saying "it's easy" --that's something to look into as well. "Easy" in the face what most folks consider reality? I don't think that deep down anyone has an easy task of that unless they've erected iron clad walls around themselves and ironically are in denial about a lot more things than just climate change.

Mike

Just for fun Michael I re read your post substituting liberal for conservative , and words like deny (climate change) to promote.....and most of the stuff in between was equally valid...well except for the chiding about the effect on their progeny. I could not find a way to twist that

I think that's a good thing? Promoting empathy and compassion on and from both sides...

I realize that certain strategies simply DON'T WORK and accept that and am looking for other ways.

If facts can be met with alternate facts, why keep trying to push facts, as if facts/alternate facts are EVER going to further along a discussion?

Has anyone ever been shamed into changing their minds? Sometimes it feels like that's what some liberals are trying to do.

Just looking for other ways to attempt a sincere dialogue...and as hard as it might be to some, the only place I can see to start is to accept that everyone is entitled to their beliefs and opinions, and that certain opinions that are in a minority can be hard to have in this society that can persecute those in minorities.

I am trying to not make the same error I see a lot of liberals making here. Many are pushing conservatives away before a conversation can actually happen. Everyone needs to be shown respect.

The "chiding" at the end..yeah..that's my guilt ridden Catholic upbringing, rearing its ugly head, lol...I am a flawed human being for sure..but I'm trying..

The sad truth may be..few really want dialogue, real honest to goodness dialogue cuz that's HARD and can threaten one's beliefs. And I mean myself as well...

When I've been wrong, and it's often..it's always hard to face that..

And most of the time, no one changes their beliefs on account of what anyone else says. That's more from direct experience, in some way. Each of us are on our own adventure, and we can arrive at different places sometimes, and sometimes it's like my favorite Edward Albee quote, "Sometimes a person has to go a very long distance out of his way to come back a short distance correctly."

Mike

Humm,
Climate Change? Most likely yes. How fast. How severe? Anyone's guess. In Central America, maybe Costa Rica there is a huge city in the jungle now abandoned for who knows how long. It is so large it has not been completely explored yet. So something happened to cause it to be abandoned. We are still here so things happen and will still happen to the climate.

For those who prefer their climate change served anecdotally rather than analytically, Charlotte North Carolina had its hottest October day on record yesterday.

I understood the statement. My statement said that I see a lot of reasons not to actualize JPF as a reflection of larger societal political arguments.

The internet provides 1000s of opportunities to argue Trump other than JPF.

Currently everything is about Trump. People make their water bill about Trump.

In my neck of the woods our average temperature is ten degrees below normal, so much for global warming. In Canada we are suppose to be warming twice as fast as the rest of the world, tell that to Alberta that just had a record snowfall.

The counter-theory is that additional heat results in additional warmth to the air and the warmth adds capacity to retain moisture. And then when the earth tilts to winter that additional moisture coalesces into additional snowflakes and increases the intensity of snowfall. I cant tell you how right or wrong that is, but that is the counter theory....as I understand it.

There are several of those. The entire Mayan civilization vanished centuries before the Spanish wiped out the Aztec civilization. Could have been global warming and a resulting famine. Could have been over tilling of the crops. Could have been extended drought. Could have been war. Could have been disease. Could have been something else. I don't think that they know.

One could apply Pascal's Wager to climate change.

Pascal's Wager originated as a "bet" on the existance of God. You can Google it for background, but the essence of it ...from Wikipedia

Pascal argues that a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss (some pleasures, luxury, etc.), whereas he stands to receive infinite gains (as represented by eternity in Heaven) and avoid infinite losses (eternity in Hell).

Applying it to the climate change argument, a rational person should live as though climate change is real because the "loss" of such belief is investment in remediation (which I would argue should be borne by those who actually create the problem...but I have no issue with incentivising action through the public purse).... whereas the gain is a better environment for all and an avoidance of the problems we are seeing in weather, reduced ice caps on both poles, the disappearance of many species and reductions in many polulations of anaimals.....

Hi John,
Thanks for the nice comment. I treat everybody on here with respect, can't ya tell? Actually I consider my day a total loss until I catch hell from somebody so let those slings and arrows fly so I can feel I belong!

Some of the people here in the U.S. are unhappy that Trump got his tax Cuts thru and took away a lot of the money the Nanny Stater's hand out to citizens and illegal aliens alike. So it's either Fiscal Responsibility or down the Road to Rome.
They had to vote again to raise the National Debt so they could keep paying all those Social Programs . But, what me worry?
Maybe we will drain the Swamp yet. Geronimo!
.

Lol.... that's cute! I'm a betting man, tell you what... From Genesis to Revelation 90% of all Biblical prophecy has already come to pass. I'll bet you that last 10% is going to happen whether you believe it or not

Perhaps I'm just not being clear... God's judgement is upon those who would destroy the earth, but all faith aside for a moment...

-The powers that be are the ones responsible for destroying the earth.
-Those same powers have turned it into a political issue in an attempt to hold us accountable for cleaning up their mess.

How does that make sense?

The good news...

I'm getting a big piece of the CLIMATE CHANGE pie (thanks Greta!! Your Nobel is on its way...every bit as deserved as Obama's!). Universal Studios is so terrified of rising sea levels, they offered me twenty year's worth of Hunter Biden's Ukraine paydays for my ten acres. KA-CHING!!

Coming to Cochise, Az in the summer of 2022...The Universal Tour!!! See the shark, get the t-shirt!!

The bad news...

I once stayed at a Trump hotel so now Schiff wants to subpoena my colonoscopy records for signs of "undue influence". He did the same thing to Hope Hicks...he has a pic hanging in his office.

I would hold out CG.... Trump is gonna' have to rebuild somewhere!

No sweat...I just saw it on MSNBC, Trump will refuse to leave office in 2025 and will remain POTUS unto death. I find this claim as reliable as the one that thousands would die if Kavanaugh was confirmed.

What? That didn't happen?? What a shocker!! Huh...maybe the world won't end in twelve years, either.

It's a religion.

Pascal is a boob. Because if God exists, would He be dumb enough to believe we are being sincere, if we were just doing it cause we had nothing to lose? Faith is a bit bigger than that. I hope Pascal is right though, because that is where I stand sometimes. Hopefully honesty counts for something

I'll take that bet... ok you lost, pay me in small bills.

I believe it was Music downloading that cause the downfall of the Mayans.

Especially from downloading those monster hits, "Smells Like Yucatan Spirit," "Tangled Up In Maize," and "Mayan Calendar Girl."

They've got it all WRONG!!! Carbon dating is a FARCE!! The Mayans were actually pre-historic. They died out because the atmosphere spontaneously combusted from all the dinosaur farts!

what part about "seek to believe in God" did you not understand?....

Though I may be over reacting to the boob comment when I see your closing

I got you Japov

Anyone well enough Googled knows these dinosour farts are still recycled through volcanoes, and that Krakatoa was an especially harsh reminder of those early atmospheric cauldrons that enveloped our Gaia Mother Earth.

Wait a minute... I thought volcanoes were the holes left behind from when the Martians tried to steal the earth's core, but they died from mosquito bites.....?

True, unlike their neighboring Aztecs (also pre-historic) who harnessed the dinosaur fart into an efficient fuel.

Exactly! The Aztecs figured out how to mount the catalytic converters.

Wow that is such a little known fact I thought only a few people knew. I was told it is because they worshipped a weird flying creature called Quetzalcoatl and also loved alliteration, so catalytic converter was really not such a stretch

Yea, Quetzalcoatl was a talking Pterodactyl

you wrote "Pascal argues that a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss (some pleasures, luxury, etc.), whereas he stands to receive infinite gains (as represented by eternity in Heaven) and avoid infinite losses (eternity in Hell)."

Basicly saying, why not believe in God, there is nothing to lose. Thats not faith, thats a coin toss.

And you weaving it into global warming, I have no idea how that happened.

Look, you seem like an intelligent guy, but one quick tip, when you suggest others do this or do that when they comment, and or/read, dont be so condescending when you request that.

Ummm.... Lol.... I believe the premise of this entire thread has been "The belief in global warming is a religion...." The real question should be, if this premise is true, then who is God?

Im not picking sides on left and right, but I will say one thing. Google is known to be favorable to the left. When somebody does a search for say "global Warming" The left view will usually be listed first, while the right buried under the pile. THAT, I dont like, and its easy to not even notice it.. And Polls are virtually useless, every poll in the country said Trump would lose in a landslide.

Here is an article that shows just how many scientists DONT think Global Warming is an issue. Most do believe it but it's certainly not a proven fact

http://ossfoundation.us/projects/en...00-scientists-say-no-convincing-evidence

If you dont believe me about Google. Type in "Global Warming"

Three top stories: USATODAY, WIRED, and Washington Post

Type in "Trump"

Three top Stories: CNN, NY Times and Washington Post

Yea, that’s precisely the reason I dropped my Facebook and Twitter accounts!
Speaking of hostile environments.......

Charging Google is favourable to the left in its search algorithms is quite a stretch Fdemetrio.

Simply Google "Google Search Algorithm Inputs" and you will find what it IS they consider. I assure you their political views do not enter into it

Oh and Japov. Another interesting fact about the Aztecs, probably more widely known. They were really good at performing half heart transplants

You’re really up on the Aztecs John, why is that?

A continuing saga...

The NYT is reporting there's a second whistleblower with more information. Well...

...it's me. I've been reluctant to come forward because I'm so afraid of Trump, I have two front doors, both installed by Schiff.

The story may be overshadowed by the breaking news about
Elizabeth Warren. Apparently she was let go as a special needs teacher eighty years ago because she was visibly pregnant with Tonto's baby.

Funny story... I almost bought a house in Miami, Oklahoma around the same time EW was doing her rain dance. In Oklahoma they take that very seriously... in fact, questions about your bloodlines are on loan applications and such. Turns out, I'm more Indian than she is lol

Why the cheap shots at Elizabeth Warren all of a sudden? This was supposed to be about cheap shots at people who believe the climate change scientists.

Just tie that hat securely to your guitar Gavin... So when the floods come we'll know who it belongs to!

Then the fish ate the mosquitoes, the cats ate the fish, the cats fertilized the bananas that fed the monkeys that evolved into US! That’s why evolution is still evident to this day... There is no missing link, WE ARE MONKEY/MARTIAN HYBRIDS!!!

Aw,
All the big spending Libs sat on a wall,
All the big spending Libs had a great fall,
All the Kings horses, all the Kings men,
Couldn't put the Libs together again.

Little Boy Blue, come blow your horn,
The Libs are stealing your money,
Show them your scorn!

Well, that would explain some of the folks I know:)

Would also explain why we all suffer from ADD..... Ha, Joe Biden!

Nice theories John. Logically, why would I use google to ask if google is biased?

If they are not biased, it lays out like they are, so its just as effective for the left. And im in the middle on politics

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/10/study-google-searches-favor-left-wing-content.php

https://www.allsides.com/blog/audit-google-heavily-favors-cnn-and-left-media-mass-shooting-coverage

https://slate.com/technology/2015/12/why-google-search-results-favor-democrats.html

a day or two ago, our bratty Pinhead of the United States (POTUS) tweeted about his
Great and Unmatched Wisdom’

no winky face or smiley emoticon. just his bare unabashed pompus opinion of himself. a bratty 8 year-old, pretending to be president.

and this uncontrolled child brat fires any adult in the room that disagrees with him. and this child brat has the freakin nuclear football.

I do not have much hope that any of us will live long enough to see who was right about global warming.

Hmmm… This is truly a conundrum… I just can’t figure out what liberals expect me to do… Sell my guns? Burn my DD-214? Burn the flag? Renounce my citizenship and oath to this nation’s Constitution? March in the streets and demand recognition despite my unconstitutional leanings? Pat my son on the back and tell him Christianity is a cult and it’s OK to be gay…..?

I don’t think so…

In fact… this is “clear and present” cause to vote for Trump!

I noted that "great and unmatched wisdom" tweet quote as well...used in conjunction with his decision to pull troops out of Syria, leaving allies in the fight against ISIS exposed to their very real ememies, the Turks. Kurds and Turks have a complicated history, as do the Kurds and Iraq. After WWI, in the wake of the dismantling of the Ottoman Empire, the English and French in all their Great and Unmatched Wisdom decided to carve up the middle east along their artificially created borders instead of tribal\ethnic lines so that the Kurds are significant minorities in both Turkey and Iraq which has become a problem. Turkey is afraid of Kurdish nationalism and has suppressed them for some time. It was the Kurds that Saddam Hussien gassed for rebelling

In Iraq the Kurds emerged a lot more powerful after US intervention and were leaders in the fight to rid themselves of ISIS..which made the US position more secure, and they also fought with the US against ISIS in Syria.

Now Turkey has made no secret of their desire to solve their Kurdish problem...which is at the heart of the "we are abandoning our allies" argument ...which Trump, in his great and unmatched wisdom has simply poo pood. All he did was warn the Turks not to go beyond reasonable measures in dealing with the Kurds. Yeah....reasonable measures to put down the Kurds is OK...give that the meaning you will...in the end the critics are right in the Trump is abandoning an ally before everything is cleaned up.

More importantly, no other player is leaving and it will be up to others (which Trump also noted) to clean up..to somehow transition the region into peace.

Of course the US will have no say whatever. That will be Syria, Turkey, France, Russia, Iraq, Iran etc...not one of them is abandoning the region.

When I saw that quote I had no real idea of how to react

Part of me said "well it is simply reflective of what a dictator\strong man would say"...and we know Trump admires such leaders. Another part of me thought "what a totally unhinged thing for a president of the USA to say"...it shows full disdain for his advisors, diplomatic corps etc.

So Japov, a definite conundrum which you will have to sort out for yourself. In the end I expect you will think about things and trust your gut.

Good luck

Eh, Well,
Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing. The elections in the U.S. allow us, for the most part, to elect our reps every 2 years..
Is it perfect? No, but next election we can change our vote. The Trump haters are so bitter they can't see straight because the people, in accordance with our Constitution rejected their march to Socalism and voted for Free Enterprise instead.

While it is somewhat hidden, the Liberals, Progressives, Democrats, and Commuists want to run the country but they want the Republicans and Conservatives to pay for it. If all those Liberal Programs were working so well, we wouldn't have a nearly 23 Trillion Dollar Federal debt. Uncle Sam pays most of the world's bills now. The Tax payers are tired of it. Trump understands that and is saying it with no holds barred. As long as we give handouts to most of the rest of the world, they will never improve. Got it?

There were only 50 troops to pull out of Syria..... Trump is bringing our boys home just like he promised. You liberals can’t play it both ways, Trump has never had any interest in policing the world... as evidenced by moving our embassy to Jerusalem. Trump is bringing our troops and business Home, the democrats are just getting in the way.

To say Trump is not interested in policing the world goes contrary to his stance on Iran, which he has decided in his "great and unmatched wisdom" (and most likely some prodding by Israel and Saudi Arabia) needs to stop being a regional power and definitely needs to scale down its arsenal. In this case, withdrawing from a treaty that was a great first step that could actually be built upon, Trump invents a stick to beat his favourite dog...anything Obama did....and decides unilaterally to impose sanctions. If that is not policing the world...what is? And his attempt...so far unsuccessful...to de nuclearize N Korea? What is that?

And moving the embassy to Jerusalem was an example of policing the world because the US is clearly taking sides at the same time it is trying to find a peace deal. Jersusalem is sacred to the three Abrahamic faiths and the Palestinians and muslims have essentially been shoved aside there with a big slap in their collective face. Here Trump clearly signalled...forget you were ever in Jerusalem...it is not yours anymore...I, in my Great and Unmatched Wisdom" have spoken

And realistically, the number of troops being withdrawn ...and I will take 50 as the number if you say that is all that was left in that operating theatre...is not the point. It is the symbolism...the statement...that matters here.

Now should others pick up the pieces, or take on a greater share? Yup...good point. But if the US wants to have a say, leaving allies and other countries behind there is not the way to go

Still, if it all works out...and the region does not once again descend into war...then IMO he can stand behind his election promise.

Sorry for my doom and gloom rant earlier. this morning. perhaps I even have that in common with Trump, when the world has me so upset that I cant sleep, I get really pissed and lash out with written words.

but I do stand behind him having the personality of a brat child. so many things he does and says reflect the personalithy of a spoiled brat.

He used a sharpie to alter a weather map to show a projected course of a hurricane rather than admit he made a simple mistake of thinking it would hit Alabama. Its not that he was wrong that bothers me, its that only a child would try such a stunt. and expect to get away with it Did he really think no one would notice. the map and a sloppy black line different from all the others? Is he really that stupid, or does he just think we are?

While I think Trump is steering us in the mostly wrong direction, I respect that you think he is steering in a mostly good direction. But I fear that whether you like the direction or not, its still a bratty 8 year old driving. and if someone tries to tell him a creek is too deep to cross or he is taking a turn too fast, he is more likely to fire them than listen to them.

Ray you do have to add those pesky Republicans to your list because, as I have clearly proven to you in the past, they have also done their fair share of adding to the public debt...and Trump is set to explode it more.

The basic reality is there is no political stance involved in spending, whatever party controls the purse strings.It is at that point a free for all by those who want public funds for their people, whoever they are...and the decision to fund involves horse trading in back rooms by legislators, lobbies, the need to be re elected and have campaigns funded....

Trump himself promised to eliminate the public debt entirely by the end of his 8 year presidency..instead it is projected to go from 20 to 30 trillion dollars before he gets halfway there....get that? From day 1 the debt goes from zero to 20 trillion. Under Trump and his few years in office it swells to 30 trillion. Statistically that is "up by 50%"

Big thumbs up for that guy with "great and unmatched wisdom"

That is factually incorrect. You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.


https://www.marketwatch.com/story/h...tributed-to-the-national-debt-2018-10-29

Aw, humm John V.
Every big Social Spending Program was put in place by what party? The Democrats! Now to be fair at times some people need a little help and we have Welfare Programs to provide some help. No problem. Now John, the Democrats had the Congress for 40 straight years so why isn't everything fixed by now? What Hoppen? We have a nearly, (and growing) 23 Trillion dollar Federal Debt. I read where our children are subject to a Welfare Fund where the parents receive a child subsity.
My parents raised 6 children born from 1930 to 1943. There was no child welfare program at that time. Our parents provided the "Welfare". So much for that. The question now is, Is the next stop Rome? Trump is battling all the big spending Liberals big time. The "Swamp" is overflowing. Nero is Fiddling and the liberals are scheming. So do we all become California? Who will keep the lights on and the Grocery Shelves filled?

From the artcile you cited yourself

"Donald Trump claimed on the campaign trail that, as president, he would completely eliminate the then–$19 trillion in national debt. Let’s just say he’s not exactly on track. Since he made that promise in early 2016, the debt has ballooned to $21.7 trillion, and his tax cuts are expected to drive that number higher."

That higher number was extrapolated to 30 trillion in that source I looked up, but hey, extrapolation is opinion, so Trump is currently up 3 Trillion from 19 to 22 with more years to go

PLUS your source supports what I said...the Republicans also loosen the purse strings substantially when in power. No party is immune.

Apples are being compared to the orange man here By those figures, Trump has added 4.78 trillion in 3 years. If he were to serve 8 years like Obama at that rate he would add 12.75 trillion, easily surpassing Obama.

That much is fact derived straight from the charts and numbers you pointed us to. After that, admittedly, you get into opinion or conflicting economic theory. Obama's addition to the debt was mostly because of the stimulus to dig the country out of the great recession. He handed over a booming economy. Traditional economic theory is that you use that time to try to reduce deficits and debt.

Most analysts expect that under the present administration the debt will grow by considerably more than that. Again, that is open to debate.

Not true. Nowhere in that article was that statement made. The actual statement was:


"As you can see, Barack Obama takes the crown with almost $9 trillion added to the heap, though Trump may surpass that by the time he’s done."


Quite a stretch.

" He handed over a booming economy."


https://nypost.com/2018/09/12/this-economy-definitely-is-not-obamas-recovery/



Yer killin' me, man.

It's becoming increasingly obvious that nobody is going to change their view any time soon. It seems my initial theory was right, politics is a form of entertainment.

We're participating in this because it's something to do, while pretending were songwriters....lol

People enjoy being challenged by the left and or right, and enjoy firiing back.

I never observed this before the internet. I realize i could only come across a limited amount of people, but for some reason politics was not as big of a deal.

I dont recall ever arguing with anyone about politics before the net, and also TV NEWS shows.

Then again, when watching 60 minutes I never once saw somebody say "Hey, you know what, you make a lot of sense, Im now a Republican, or Democrat.

Never happened, not once, wont happen here either.

All we can hope for is common sense and common decency teaming up and making this country liveable

Most movements of the government rarely make a big impact on any one of us, why do we care so much?

I wasn't saying that the article was factually incorrect. I noted that sentence. I was saying that your post was factually incorrect because you said that the article refuted what John said. The only way to arrive at that conclusion was either deliberately or accidentally to misinterpret the data. If you were posting it to lend support to John's statement, you should have said so instead of telling him that he was factually incorrect and was "entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts."

Rupert Murdoch's New York Post. The author bio: "Stephen Moore is a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation and a former senior economic adviser to the Trump campaign. His new book, “Trumponomics,” will be published next month." That's some pretty objective analysis right there.

I wasn't speaking to John's point at all. I was speaking to YOU. Try to keep up.

I hadn't said anything when you posted in reply to John. You're hearing voices in your head. The bad news is that one of them seems to be mine, which I think you probably get more than enough of here

Then why could I QUOTE YOU?

Jeez. Did you see this part in the title line?

"Re: A word about my absence... [Re: Gavin Sinclair] "


Reading comprehension problem, there Gavin?

Nope - nothing wrong with mine.

#1157464 - 2 hours ago Re: A word about my absence... [Re: John Voorpostel]

That's the one you were reponding to when you said: "That is factually incorrect. You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts." and posted the link.

Let's drop the subject of whose reading comprehension has a problem.

For the last time: I was responding to YOU, not John. How's that Songwriter's Junction doin' Gav?

You weren't. You couldn't have been. Just like I told you, I hadn't said anything when you posted your response. So, if you were responding to me you did it before I said anything to respond to.

Oh, and just fine thanks, but I don't think it's good etiquette to talk about it on here, so I won't.

This is stupid. Arguing about what you were responding to. Have the last word if you want.

"You weren't. You couldn't have been. Just like I told you, I hadn't said anything when you posted your response. So, if you were responding to me you did it before I said anything to respond to."



Well there you have it. I am a mind reader.

When are all of you going realize that we’ve been engaged in an economic war with the EU since they threatened to send us into another "great depression" back in the 90's? The Obamas, Clintons, Gores and the rest want to JOIN THE EU! The reason Trump wants to bring business back home, make America "self sufficient" again, and get out of this world trade/deficit scenario is because... WE CAN... and we are the only thing stopping the federal reserve, the UN, and the EU from implementing a world wide currency! This war isn’t limited to American political ideologies, the progressive socialist democrat party are GLOBALISTS!!!

My dad can beat up your dad

Now that has to be the absolute best post to this thread. Big thank you for the morning chuckle.

And your mother wears army boots

Whazzat?
You had a mother? Do tell. Now back to music. Mr. Moon by Carl Smith Google it. And don't forget Fiscal Responsibility!!!